Why USD CAN go DI.

[Haldersham]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

SDSU's '05-'06 budget is balanced.

http://www3.sdstate.edu/ClassLibrary...port_05-06.pdf

Budgeted revenue total of $7,786,383.

Budgeted expenses total of $7,786,383.


Go State!  

Budgeted versus actual are not the same. If there is a weakness in the annual report, its the financial section. There is much more that could be published which would give everyone a better picture. Since the numbers have to be sent to the US Dept of Education as documentation of compliance with Title IX, I dont see why more actual information could not be published. I suppose one reason they have not been more detailed is that the report apparently is published before June 30, the end of the accounting year, and there are many unrecorded and uncompleted transactions that might not give a true picture.

Also from the Dept Ed figures, there apparently was no request for cash on hand at the beginning of the period nor the balance at the end of the period so even if expenses exceeded revunue, it might not be problem because of an on hand cash balance was there to start the accounting year.

Numbers can be trickey, and unless we hear about positions being eliminated as they were at UNO, I would not be worried.  I do think financially we are on solid ground.

[89rabbit]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

[quote author=89rabbit link=1150320172/15#27 date=1151268781]SDSU's '05-'06 budget is balanced.

http://www3.sdstate.edu/ClassLibrary...port_05-06.pdf

Budgeted revenue total of $7,786,383.

Budgeted expenses total of $7,786,383.


Go State!  

Budgeted versus actual are not the same. If there is a weakness in the annual report, its the financial section. There is much more that could be published which would give everyone a better picture. Since the numbers have to be sent to the US Dept of Education as documentation of compliance with Title IX, I dont see why more actual information could not be published. I suppose one reason they have not been more detailed is that the report apparently is published before June 30, the end of the accounting year, and there are many unrecorded and uncompleted transactions that might not give a true picture.

Also from the Dept Ed figures, there apparently was no request for cash on hand at the beginning of the period nor the balance at the end of the period so even if expenses exceeded revunue, it might not be problem because of an on hand cash balance was there to start the accounting year.

Numbers can be trickey, and unless we hear about positions being eliminated as they were at UNO, I would not be worried.  I do think financially we are on solid ground.[/quote]

True enough and I don't really care to get into an accounting debate.  My point was and is that USD's budget is nowhere near $6 million as some folks were speculating and is nowhere near what SDSU's is and they would have a lot of work to do to go D-I.  If the numbers are not exact it does not change my base premise.


Go State!

[Haldersham]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

I was not wanting to debate either, accounting or otherwise. I agree SDSU's budget has grown as expected and revenues as best I can tell have kept up with expenditures.  USD is not anywhere near 7 million nor is UND near 17 million as one Sioux Fan stated on their message board. Subtract hockey from UND and you see a very different number for their budget.

[NightHawk78]

What is Going On in Vermillion?

http://www.d2football.com/board/inde...showtopic=1156

I think numerous D-2 (and some D-1) sports fans (on numerous boards) are extremely curious what is going on with USD since Pres. Abbott announced the D-1 task force. I think the remaining NCC schools are waiting to see what USD will do before deciding whether to save the NCC, shut it down and move on to NSIC, or go to D-1 themselves. Has anyone else heard any timetable or inklings as to what USD will do??

[jackmd]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

[quote author=filbert link=1150320172/15#25 date=1151252995]http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/Search.asp lists USD's budget for 2004-05 as $4,311,013 revenues, $4,265,076 expenses.

SDSU's budget numbers for the same year (2004-05) were $6,280,833 revenues, $6,547,381 expenses--153% of USD's budget.

Except for the fact that the Jacks were in the red. Would rather have the smaller budget and be in the black.[/quote]

Its called investing in the future for a reason. Nothing about the move to DI should be measured in the short-term, thats just plain naive. To put it more bluntly, "you have got to spend money to make money."

[89rabbit]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

Interesting stuff from USD:

http://www.usd.edu/senate/ABC06.pdf



Go State!

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

Wasn't able to see the detailed report, just 47 blank pages. The date of the meeting was June 7, 2006, since UND announced its switch about 2 weeks later. Maybe that is why the detailed report is no longer available. Here is the summary in the minutes, but it looks like USD was not looking favorable on moving to D-1.

Athletic Board of Control

Professor Steve Johnson summarized the Annual Report from the Athletic Board of Control (attached). This is Professor Johnson’s third year as committee chair. He stated this past year was noteworthy for the athletic department for the following reasons:

Professor Jack Powell has served as Faculty Athletic Representative for 9 years and was selected to host the NCAA legislative committee and task force assignments. As he is retiring from the Business School this year, Dr. Christina Kellar will fill his position on the committee. Professor Johnson praised Professor Powell’s hard work and dedication.
The women’s locker room was renovated.
The athletic department has balanced its budget by decreasing expenditures 10% and increasing revenue 8%. Professor Johnson stated there was a $500,000 deficit when Joel Nielsen became athletic director in 2003.
A NCAA post graduate scholarship was awarded to USD athlete Marci Miller. Turner Trofholz was named Division II National Player of the Year in men’s basketball. Wesley Beschomer was named runner-up for the 2005 Harlon Hill Award as top football player in NCAA Division II.
The hiring of a full-time academic counselor for the athletic department has proven successful.
Although Title IX will always be a concern, Fiscal Years 2006 had a 51% male student athlete to 49% female student athlete ratio. The expected ratios in 2007 will put USD in compliance with the US Department of Education proportionality test.
The biggest concern facing USD athletics currently is the loss of UND and possibly St. Cloud State and Minnesota State at Mankato from this conference. It is not the desire of administration to move to Division I. [emphasis added] Central Washington State University and Western Washington State University will be added to the Coyotes NCC football schedule.
More information on each point is found in the detailed attached report. The Senate thanked Professor Johnson for his work. A motion was made and seconded to accept the report. Motion passed.

[filbert]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

Interesting stuff from USD:

http://www.usd.edu/senate/ABC06.pdf



Go State!

It opened for me . . .

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

Really, I've tried it with several different browsers thinking that may have some effect with the link. I was able to open the other pdf's from the minutes, just not the athletic one. Of course, that was the only one that I had any interest in. :-/

[Rabbitlivinginverm]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

Wasn't able to see the detailed report, just 47 blank pages. The date of the meeting was June 7, 2006, since UND announced its switch about 2 weeks later. Maybe that is why the detailed report is no longer available. Here is the summary in the minutes, but it looks like USD was not looking favorable on moving to D-1.

Athletic Board of Control

Professor Steve Johnson summarized the Annual Report from the Athletic Board of Control (attached). This is Professor Johnson’s third year as committee chair. He stated this past year was noteworthy for the athletic department for the following reasons:

Professor Jack Powell has served as Faculty Athletic Representative for 9 years and was selected to host the NCAA legislative committee and task force assignments. As he is retiring from the Business School this year, Dr. Christina Kellar will fill his position on the committee. Professor Johnson praised Professor Powell’s hard work and dedication.
The women’s locker room was renovated.
The athletic department has balanced its budget by decreasing expenditures 10% and increasing revenue 8%. Professor Johnson stated there was a $500,000 deficit when Joel Nielsen became athletic director in 2003.
A NCAA post graduate scholarship was awarded to USD athlete Marci Miller. Turner Trofholz was named Division II National Player of the Year in men’s basketball. Wesley Beschomer was named runner-up for the 2005 Harlon Hill Award as top football player in NCAA Division II.
The hiring of a full-time academic counselor for the athletic department has proven successful.
Although Title IX will always be a concern, Fiscal Years 2006 had a 51% male student athlete to 49% female student athlete ratio. The expected ratios in 2007 will put USD in compliance with the US Department of Education proportionality test.
The biggest concern facing USD athletics currently is the loss of UND and possibly St. Cloud State and Minnesota State at Mankato from this conference. It is not the desire of administration to move to Division I.  [emphasis added] Central Washington State University and Western Washington State University will be added to the Coyotes NCC football schedule.
More information on each point is found in the detailed attached report. The Senate thanked Professor Johnson for his work. A motion was made and seconded to accept the report. Motion passed.

Joel Nielson has been good to USD.

[Haldersham]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

The most striking part of this report is page no 46 which is the minutes of the May meeting. The report from the foundation representative was very interesting. She states the income for the current fiscal year from endowments was 69k. That is a very small amount. She also says the president allocates the income from their endowments and he has allocated little or none for athletics.  Do you think this part is going to change? Stay tuned.

I believe SDSU income from endowments for athletic scholarships is between a half to one million. This means we have somewhere between 5 to 10 million endowed. If some one has more insight or access to this information it would be of interest to me if no one else.

I do wish the minutes of BOC meetings were posted on the website so we could get a real picture about what is actually going on.

What really makes it more difficult for USD to go forward at any level is the yearly need to raise funds for scholarsships I believe that SDSU has been working on perpetual scholarships for many years and in some years the pitch has been low keyed but its been there.  Once the money is endowed it will always be available for scholarships.  Apparently this one thing that USD has not tried to copy or if so its not been very sucessful.

[JACKGUYII]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

This is off the USD Website:

http://www.usd.edu/press/news/news.c...4&uid=user

[filbert]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

Good Lord! A 26-member committee? That's expected to make a decision by November 6th? That says only one thing to me:

They'll rubber-stamp something that's already been decided.

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

My guess is they rubber stamp the admin's previous position of staying D-2.

[MilwaukeeJacksAlum]

Re: Why USD CAN go DI.

My guess is they rubber stamp the admin's previous position of staying D-2.

Exactly what I think will happen.