Coyle will not allow Spring sports to give extra scholarships to athletes with extra eligibility

Donate To GopherHole
MplsGopher said:
To me, that is a separate discussion altogether. And a valid discussion.

I'm talking a very specific thing here. I'm saying, in the spring of 2021, that the U of MN softball team will be at a competitive disadvantage to other top teams in the country from out west and down south, because those schools agreed to fund the extra scholarships of seniors who decide to return for the extra year.

If those schools can do it ... and I'm not talking only about super powerhouse football schools either ... then there is no reason the U of MN can't do it.

That's my opinion.
Click to expand...

MplsGopher, those SEC programs have 90,000-100,000 seat football stadiums filled every college football Saturday. That money makes a difference to the overall balance sheet of an athletic department. I wish it didn’t and we could do anything Alabama or Florida can do for our Baseball/Softball/Track programs but the financial surplus coming from football is just not comparable. I worked in public sector budgeting for a long time and every decision a decider has to make is driven by the money question. You can bet Coyle answered how he did entirely based upon the budget projection of the department. They always do.
 

But the problem there is that it’s peanuts compared to the nine figure athletic budget. You’re talking maybe 20-30 scholarships total.

And Coyle is allowing the expanded rosters, so they’ll be bearing all the costs associated with that.

It’s just an exceptionally cruel, nonsensical move that won’t save any money and will ultimately cost the softball team a level playing field for nationals.

I guess Coyle doesn’t care about women’s sports like Maturi did.
 

MplsGopher said:
But the problem there is that it’s peanuts compared to the nine figure athletic budget. You’re talking maybe 20-30 scholarships total.

And Coyle is allowing the expanded rosters, so they’ll be bearing all the costs associated with that.

It’s just an exceptionally cruel, nonsensical move that won’t save any money and will ultimately cost the softball team a level playing field for nationals.

I guess Coyle doesn’t care about women’s sports like Maturi did.
Click to expand...
You have made your opinion known and seem agitated that nobody agrees with you. You think Coyle has made a mistake. That's fine, you are entitled to your opinion just like anyone else. However, to suggest that it's "peanuts" totally ignores the financial crisis coming to the athletic department at the U. They are facing a budget shortfall of $7M-$10M this year (my estimate based on lost revenues this spring, mostly from the cancellation of the tournaments) and no assurance that they won't lose even more revenue next year if fall sports are cancelled or reduced in some manner.

Let's do some back of the envelope estimates. The cost of attendance for the U next year is $31,000+ for in-state tuition and $51,000+ for out-state. As I am sure you know, the athletic department pays that tuition from its budget. Some athletic departments don't have to cover that expense, but that's how it's handled here. We will ignore all of the other costs related to having a scholarship athlete on the books (like insurance, academic support, additional nutritional support, etc.) for purposes of this exercise. Assume half of the athletes are considered residents and half non-residents to keep the math simple, even though I expect that there are probably a higher percentage of non-residents. Using the mid-point of your estimate of 20-30 potential scholarships, that's $1,025,000 for next year in additional scholarship expenses in a budget that needs to reduce expenses by $7M-$10M. You call Coyle's decision cruel and nonsensical. You don't think that is a significant amount of money. I'd say it would be irresponsible for Coyle to take on that kind of additional financial liability in the current environment.

Curious why you think this is an indication Coyle doesn't support women's sports since his policy applies to all spring athletes, both the men and the women. And if you think penny-pinching Joel Maturi would have reached a different conclusion, I'd guess you haven't ever met him. Joel was proud to run the department on as lean a budget as possible.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
You have made your opinion known and seem agitated that nobody agrees with you. You think Coyle has made a mistake. That's fine, you are entitled to your opinion just like anyone else. However, to suggest that it's "peanuts" totally ignores the financial crisis coming to the athletic department at the U. They are facing a budget shortfall of $7M-$10M this year (my estimate based on lost revenues this spring, mostly from the cancellation of the tournaments) and no assurance that they won't lose even more revenue next year if fall sports are cancelled or reduced in some manner.

Let's do some back of the envelope estimates. The cost of attendance for the U next year is $31,000+ for in-state tuition and $51,000+ for out-state. As I am sure you know, the athletic department pays that tuition from its budget. Some athletic departments don't have to cover that expense, but that's how it's handled here. We will ignore all of the other costs related to having a scholarship athlete on the books (like insurance, academic support, additional nutritional support, etc.) for purposes of this exercise. Assume half of the athletes are considered residents and half non-residents to keep the math simple, even though I expect that there are probably a higher percentage of non-residents. Using the mid-point of your estimate of 20-30 potential scholarships, that's $1,025,000 for next year in additional scholarship expenses in a budget that needs to reduce expenses by $7M-$10M. You call Coyle's decision cruel and nonsensical. You don't think that is a significant amount of money. I'd say it would be irresponsible for Coyle to take on that kind of additional financial liability in the current environment.

Curious why you think this is an indication Coyle doesn't support women's sports since his policy applies to all spring athletes, both the men and the women. And if you think penny-pinching Joel Maturi would have reached a different conclusion, I'd guess you haven't ever met him. Joel was proud to run the department on as lean a budget as possible.
Click to expand...
I said that because women's sports excelled at the U under Maturi. So he obviously funded them well.

$1M is a lot to you or me, but when our overall budget for athletics is over $100M, that's less than 1%. And as I pointed out, and you specifically ignored, the U will still have to bear all the additional expenses that go into having those extra players on the roster. Coyle is allowing the rosters to expand. So all the meals, travel, academic support, insurance, etc., that isn't clipped off for non-scholarship athletes.

It's just a silly way to try to pinch some pennies.

I know what would save a lot more money: cutting baseball altogether. Wisconsin did it. So it has precedent and is allowed. Why isn't Coyle brave enough to take that step, if he really wants to be a big cost saver?
 

MplsGopher said:
I said that because women's sports excelled at the U under Maturi. So he obviously funded them well.
Click to expand...
This tells me everything I need to know about your interest in a genuine, logical analysis of the issues. If you think that dollars spent equals success, you haven’t studied the history of college sports. And the women’s programs have continued to be successful under Coyle, so I guess by your logic he’s funding them just fine.
 


2nd Degree Gopher said:
This tells me everything I need to know about your interest in a genuine, logical analysis of the issues. If you think that dollars spent equals success, you haven’t studied the history of college sports. And the women’s programs have continued to be successful under Coyle, so I guess by your logic he’s funding them just fine.
Click to expand...
You ignored the main argument, and declared victory via a meaningless tangential point.

That must be nice.
 

I don’t have to declare victory, the fact that you started the thread and found no support for your point of view speaks louder than anything I could say. I mistakenly thought you might want to discuss the topic, but all you want is for somebody, anybody, to agree with you that since it’s only $1M and college sports is big business, it’s stupid not to incur the extra expenses because the softball team might be good next year. They may end up axing sports, although I doubt baseball would be at the top of the list. But if they do eliminate sports, it will be part of cuts across the department to bridge a sizeable budgetary gap, not to offer extra scholarships to other non-revenue sports.
 

They should axe the entire athletics dept. That would save the most money!

Athletics is completely unrelated to the education and research mission of the school.
 

MplsGopher said:
They should axe the entire athletics dept. That would save the most money!

Athletics is completely unrelated to the education and research mission of the school.
Click to expand...
You're on this board, why?
 




MplsGopher said:
But the problem there is that it’s peanuts compared to the nine figure athletic budget. You’re talking maybe 20-30 scholarships total.

And Coyle is allowing the expanded rosters, so they’ll be bearing all the costs associated with that.

It’s just an exceptionally cruel, nonsensical move that won’t save any money and will ultimately cost the softball team a level playing field for nationals.

I guess Coyle doesn’t care about women’s sports like Maturi did.
Click to expand...

I am guessing Coyle is hoping that without scholarships most won't be back so he won't have to pay for travel/hotels/etc... They could always limit the travel roster size. That would save more money. Spring coaches will have a lot of difficult conversations. For softball, they got Fiser. #1 priority. Yes Partain would be great to have back but not the same as an ace pitcher.
 

Tucker, Becky does not have baseball, so you are not talking about many sports. If barry had his way, there would be mens BB and football. He would let all the other programs go away.
 

wisconsin offers ten spring sports. Their department brings in about $25M more per year than our's does. The fact that their athletic department isn't willing to let the athletes return, even paying their own tuition, demonstrates just how dire the budget crisis for these athletic departments is perceived to be. If Coyle's decision to allow the spring athletes to return without scholarships is "cruel" and "nonsensical," I can only imagine how this will be characterized.
 



ComoGopher said:
I am guessing Coyle is hoping that without scholarships most won't be back so he won't have to pay for travel/hotels/etc... They could always limit the travel roster size.
Click to expand...
He has already told spring coaches he would allowed the expanded rosters, per my link. Could he change that, sure. But I'm going off what he has told them so far.

ComoGopher said:
For softball, they got Fiser. #1 priority. Yes Partain would be great to have back but not the same as an ace pitcher.
Click to expand...
It's the principle that matters.

If it's "OK" to not let our softball (or baseball, or track) be on a level playing field with what SEC schools are spending, then why even allow them to max out their scholarships at all? Why allow them to spend a full budget? Etc. Just cut the sport, that saves the most money.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
wisconsin offers ten spring sports. Their department brings in about $25M more per year than our's does. The fact that their athletic department isn't willing to let the athletes return, even paying their own tuition, demonstrates just how dire the budget crisis for these athletic departments is perceived to be. If Coyle's decision to allow the spring athletes to return without scholarships is "cruel" and "nonsensical," I can only imagine how this will be characterized.
Click to expand...
If Wisconsin jumped off a bridge, would you?
 

Tucker said:
Wisconsin is not even letting the seniors receive the extra season of eligibility, let alone the scholarship.
Click to expand...
Terrible.

Big Ten/NCAA should step in and force them.
 


MplsGopher said:
He has already told spring coaches he would allowed the expanded rosters, per my link. Could he change that, sure. But I'm going off what he has told them so far.


It's the principle that matters.

If it's "OK" to not let our softball (or baseball, or track) be on a level playing field with what SEC schools are spending, then why even allow them to max out their scholarships at all? Why allow them to spend a full budget? Etc. Just cut the sport, that saves the most money.
Click to expand...

Such a drama queen. This is not that big of a deal. Softball fans should feel very fortunate that we get Fiser back.
 

Senior season stolen away from you, NCAA says it's allowable to let those players come back for an extra year, and your school takes a giant shit on your head. Yeah F that.

I'd even consider a lawsuit against UW, if I were them.
 

MplsGopher said:
Senior season stolen away from you, NCAA says it's allowable to let those players come back for an extra year, and your school takes a giant shit on your head. Yeah F that.

I'd even consider a lawsuit against UW, if I were them.
Click to expand...
Transfer.
 

OR stay and fight them. Shove it right up their ass.

I like that better
 

MplsGopher said:
If Wisconsin jumped off a bridge, would you?
Click to expand...
Nope. I think I prefer Coyle's decision to Barry's, but Barry is revered in wisconsin, so he has more leeway than most ADs. It isn't going to be just wisconsin and Minnesota that opt out of the increased scholarship expense. The schools are trying to budget for a range of outcomes that start at horrific and get worse from there. I am afraid that you are still all alone in your opinion on this one.
 

MplsGopher said:
Senior season stolen away from you, NCAA says it's allowable to let those players come back for an extra year, and your school takes a giant shit on your head. Yeah F that.

I'd even consider a lawsuit against UW, if I were them.
Click to expand...
Okay, Johnnie Cochran, give us the thumbnail sketch of your legal theory on this one. (Hint, it wasn't the University that "stole" their season. Unless maybe you are planning to sue the virus?)

MplsGopher said:
OR stay and fight them. Shove it right up their ass.

I like that better
Click to expand...
Too funny. Fight them with what?
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
Hint, it wasn't the University that "stole" their season.
Click to expand...
This is exactly the same thing as a drunk driver who crashed into and kills someone while under the influence saying "hey, it wasn't me who "stole" your daughter's life, it was the alcohol company, deal with them".
 

If catching on means that the university somehow isn't negligent for an optional decision that it chose to make on its own behalf, then yes you're catching on.
 



MplsGopher said:
He has already told spring coaches he would allowed the expanded rosters, per my link. Could he change that, sure. But I'm going off what he has told them so far.


It's the principle that matters.

If it's "OK" to not let our softball (or baseball, or track) be on a level playing field with what SEC schools are spending, then why even allow them to max out their scholarships at all? Why allow them to spend a full budget? Etc. Just cut the sport, that saves the most money.
Click to expand...

Those on the softball board have already heard my views on this subject (most disagree with me I think) but I just have to say that if you are trying to have your Big Ten program compete against the SEC in softball or baseball you are basically destined to bang your head against a brick wall in perpetuity.

Your real competition is other Big Ten teams. Your championship is the Big Ten championship. Your goal should be winning Big Tens. Do those things and then anything after that is unexpected desert.

But fans and the program should not be geared for thinking that their competition is against the Florida/Alabama/LSU/Texas/Arizona/UCLA etc. teams of the SEC/Pac12. Why? The NCAA competitive seasons do not align with the northern weather. When it is too hot to play softball/baseball in the South, there is no NCAA season as it is the traditional summer break. So 100 percent of the softball/baseball season in the SEC takes place under really good weather to play softball/baseball. About 20% of the Gophers’ softball/baseball season takes place during good weather to play those sports. It is a huge disadvantage in recruiting.

If you are a Gophers softball or baseball fanatic (as I am), focus on the B1G as your completion and you will find yourself a happier and more contented person.
 

Baseball fine, but you’re wrong on softball. In fact weren’t we ranked #1 in the nation a couple years ago?
 

MplsGopher said:
Baseball fine, but you’re wrong on softball. In fact weren’t we ranked #1 in the nation a couple years ago?
Click to expand...

I am extremely well aware of that fact. A team like the Gophers may never have a pitcher like Sara Groenewagen again. She was that dominant; especially in 2017. And she was barely recruited at all before her senior season in high school in British Columbia. We got SO lucky with her; a basically Unrecruited diabetic who turned out to have the nastiest change up college softball has seen maybe ever. You won’t see that type of from nowhere rise to pitching excellence again in your whole life. Luck can get a team like the Gophers a few great seasons in a row, but it cannot last forever like it does with the Oklahoma’s of the NCAA.

Which brings me to my proof. After 2019 Trachsel worked hard to recruit a high school phenom pitcher from the Nebraska/Iowa border who just de-committed from a fellow Big Ten school (Nebraska). We had just come off a Women’s college World Series run. Now was the time to get a northern phenom like that and... Jordy Bahil committed to... Oklahoma.

YOU are wrong if you think we can ever “continually” compete at the top 8 level of the NCAA. What we can continually do is compete in the top tier of the Big Ten. And that should be good enough if you are a logical, dispassionate person.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom