Sunday Q & A: Gophers AD Norwwod Teague

Donate To GopherHole

Q The facility upgrade plan was unveiled eight months ago. What can you tell me about progress at this point?

A We feel very good about the progress we’ve been making. You always want to move as quickly as possible, but the truth is there are many steps in the process to ensure you’re doing it right. ... We’ve been continuing our efforts to make our dollars go further and build a series of athletic facilities for our student-athletes that won’t disrupt their training and development during construction. At the same time, we’ve been conducting the comprehensive fundraising feasibility study you’ve heard me speak of to better understand what is possible in the time frames we’ve set.



Q I’ve heard whispers that T. Denny Sanford might be back in the fundraising picture despite earlier reports to the contrary. Any truth to that?

A We’ve never identified anyone as being in or out of our fundraising efforts. Fundraising and friend-raising are based on long-term relationships with university supporters who want to make a real difference for the student-athletes and the school, and those relationships are what we are currently building in the athletics department.

Go Gophers!!
 

That was one of the most substance-less interviews I've ever read. The Strib probably should've just had Chris Werle email the talking points to Rand to print verbatim.
 





I hadn't heard that Sanford might be a possibility again as a donor. That'd be nice.
 

I heard him on with Barreiro the other day. He didn't answer any of his questions either.
 

So are we fundraising or conducting a fundraising feasibility study? Who in their right mind would donate a large sum of money to a project that the U isn't even sure is feasible?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
 



MadtownGopher said:
So are we fundraising or conducting a fundraising feasibility study? Who in their right mind would donate a large sum of money to a project that the U isn't even sure is feasible?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
the program feasibility study determined that the buildings in fact are feasible now we must conduct a fundraising feasibility study to determine the feasibility of fundraising and friend making. After both fundraising feasibility and program feasibility studies are determined to be feasible then we can commence the actual fundraising which has been determined to be feasible for the aforementioned program which also is being determined to be feasible. Ya fease me?
 

If a feasibility study lasts 9 months then the thing it is studying is probably not feasible.
 

Grant said:
If a feasibility study lasts 9 months then the thing it is studying is probably not feasible.
Click to expand...

Or the thing it is studying is a gigantic project, slated to cost well over a hundred million dollars, that requires an incredible level of coordination. Something that genuinely requires a very in-depth analysis.

But nah, they should just look at a map and go "yep, the facility should go here. Have we cashed the donation checks yet?"
 

Money needs to start flowing soon. Hopefully this summer.

Would they start building facilities on a rolling basis or wait for every last dime before any construction begins?
 



Gopherguy0723 said:
Money needs to start flowing soon. Hopefully this summer.

Would they start building facilities on a rolling basis or wait for every last dime before any construction begins?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure Norwood has said they'd start building whatever is priority #1 when they had enough money just for that piece. I don't think they need the $190 million before starting anything, if that's what you meant. At least I'd hope not.
 

I got the impression that it was a way of artfully dodging the issue of completely lacking the funds to do anything, in the meantime they are studying the issue.
 

jaymil said:
I'm pretty sure Norwood has said they'd start building whatever is priority #1 when they had enough money just for that piece. I don't think they need the $190 million before starting anything, if that's what you meant. At least I'd hope not.
Click to expand...

I hope that's the case, but I don't remember hearing him say it. The olympic training center can wait.
 

PitinoFan said:
I hope that's the case, but I don't remember hearing him say it. The olympic training center can wait.
Click to expand...

Right now it feels like they are saying - hey if you give us the money- trust us we will do something big with it over time. I would like to see an approach that shows their list of priorities as well as a timetable to accomplish them. Set some goals and make them public. You aren't going to get the whole thing done with T Denny types- they need to get the public engaged as well. Selfishly- I think they ought to be getting rolling on a basketball practice facility NOW. That's the biggest glaring need. Are we behind the curve on football practice and training facilities? Sure. But in basketball we are way, way behind and we have a golden opportunity with this coach. The time is now. I don't like what we are seeing in terms of dithering around on this.
 

jaymil said:
I'm pretty sure Norwood has said they'd start building whatever is priority #1 when they had enough money just for that piece. I don't think they need the $190 million before starting anything, if that's what you meant. At least I'd hope not.
Click to expand...

Why would donors keep giving the school money after basketball and football facilities are build first if they don't care about the other sports? Isn't it possible if they build as they got the money, that donations would just stop because people would have gotten what they wanted already? Wouldn't it be wiser to wait until the money is raised before building to ensure you get the most money possible from donors. Don't get me wrong, I want a basketball and football practice facility build ASAP, but it probably be in the schools best interest to wait until they got the whole chunk of money otherwise they are going to have a hard time getting facilities for sports most people just don't care about.
 

GuyFawkes said:
Why would donors keep giving the school money after basketball and football facilities are build first if they don't care about the other sports? Isn't it possible if they build as they got the money, that donations would just stop because people would have gotten what they wanted already? Wouldn't it be wiser to wait until the money is raised before building to ensure you get the most money possible from donors. Don't get me wrong, I want a basketball and football practice facility build ASAP, but it probably be in the schools best interest to wait until they got the whole chunk of money otherwise they are going to have a hard time getting facilities for sports most people just don't care about.
Click to expand...

Your assumptions that mainstream fan's priorities align with the donors I can guarantee you is 100% inaccurate.
 

jaymil said:
I'm pretty sure Norwood has said they'd start building whatever is priority #1 when they had enough money just for that piece. I don't think they need the $190 million before starting anything, if that's what you meant. At least I'd hope not.
Click to expand...
So the women's rowing annex is first up?
 

beavergopher said:
So the women's rowing annex is first up?
Click to expand...

Probably. This whole thing is starting to smack of traditional U of M "blue ribbon panel" to analyze things to death approach. How many years has this been an issue for? They should be able to define the what they want to do and in what order by now.
 

Winasota Gopher said:
the program feasibility study determined that the buildings in fact are feasible now we must conduct a fundraising feasibility study to determine the feasibility of fundraising and friend making. After both fundraising feasibility and program feasibility studies are determined to be feasible then we can commence the actual fundraising which has been determined to be feasible for the aforementioned program which also is being determined to be feasible. Ya fease me?
Click to expand...

I have never heard String Theory explained so concisely and yet completely. You are a bleedin' genius! Thank You!!!
 

Really, when you think about it, the University provides so many nuggets to the State. A land grant institution that I consider infrastructure. This belongs on Capitol Hill in St. Paul. Budget the University for facility improvment at 50 million for 4 years to get the ball rolling. Here is the problem at the University. The major donor's to the U involve themselves in research and development, arts and sciences, etc. For some reason, athletics is an after thought.
You did not have one major alumnl donor on the individual level step up for TCF. We had to do a plertha of naming right donations to get the stadium built. The only athletic complex I can think of that had a major donor was Rider Arena. Lou Nanne heads up the committee for fund raising, and he has been strangly quiet. Not good..
 

ruppertflywheel said:
Really, when you think about it, the University provides so many nuggets to the State. A land grant institution that I consider infrastructure. This belongs on Capitol Hill in St. Paul. Budget the University for facility improvment at 50 million for 4 years to get the ball rolling. Here is the problem at the University. The major donor's to the U involve themselves in research and development, arts and sciences, etc. For some reason, athletics is an after thought.
You did not have one major alumnl donor on the individual level step up for TCF. We had to do a plertha of naming right donations to get the stadium built. The only athletic complex I can think of that had a major donor was Rider Arena. Lou Nanne heads up the committee for fund raising, and he has been strangly quiet. Not good..
Click to expand...


It seems that part of the problem is that the U doesn't send out people to sell University athletics as something that can really advance the whole institution. Instead they pussy foot around and always talk about how the athletics has to come last. Guess what- that's where it ends up. What has sports success done for the University of Michigan, Ohio State, North Carolina, Kentucky, Duke, Nebraska and many others? I would argue that a big time successful sports program gets you more notoriety as a University than your academic success does. That may sound ugly but it's reality. Nike doesn't need Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods in order to make good products. But having those as marketing tools sells the products and enables the company to get better- because of the financial success. Major college sports are huge marketing tools for schools and if used properly can make the school better and raise the image in the community and across the nation.
 

bga1 said:
It seems that part of the problem is that the U doesn't send out people to sell University athletics as something that can really advance the whole institution. Instead they pussy foot around and always talk about how the athletics has to come last. Guess what- that's where it ends up. What has sports success done for the University of Michigan, Ohio State, North Carolina, Kentucky, Duke, Nebraska and many others? I would argue that a big time successful sports program gets you more notoriety as a University than your academic success does. That may sound ugly but it's reality. Nike doesn't need Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods in order to make good products. But having those as marketing tools sells the products and enables the company to get better- because of the financial success. Major college sports are huge marketing tools for schools and if used properly can make the school better and raise the image in the community and across the nation.
Click to expand...

Cannot remember the last time the engineering program graced the front page of the Strib.....
 

All this fear and loathing!!!!

When Northwestern announced to plans for the lakefront facility, about 16-18 months passed before they announced that the 220M was raised. There wasn't one word on the progress, they just plucked away and got the money. It has been about 7 months here. Give it some time.
 

bga1 said:
It seems that part of the problem is that the U doesn't send out people to sell University athletics as something that can really advance the whole institution. Instead they pussy foot around and always talk about how the athletics has to come last. Guess what- that's where it ends up. What has sports success done for the University of Michigan, Ohio State, North Carolina, Kentucky, Duke, Nebraska and many others? I would argue that a big time successful sports program gets you more notoriety as a University than your academic success does. That may sound ugly but it's reality. Nike doesn't need Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods in order to make good products. But having those as marketing tools sells the products and enables the company to get better- because of the financial success. Major college sports are huge marketing tools for schools and if used properly can make the school better and raise the image in the community and across the nation.
Click to expand...
I agree. Florida Gulf Coast had an application increase of i think somewhere around 30% if i remember correctly after their sweet 16.

Edit: Between From March 21 to March 25, unique visitors to the admissions page on FGCU’s website leaped from 2,280 to 42,793. Overall visits to the school’s website topped out on Monday at 230,985, not counting the 117,113 who went directly to the athletics page. In the month leading up to FGCU’s advancing to the Sweet 16, visitors to the website had seen a daily count as low as 18,863.

http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/dollars/post/_/id/3222/how-fgcus-run-can-benefit-admissions
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom