Academic Center a Go?

[66volvo]

Building an athletic center with private donated money is well enough. But there are the long-term expenses of maintenance and staffing that will affect the university's general fund for years to come. Face it, there are no really free lunches. Private money is one-time; long-term operational funds will be required each fiscal to run this place.

 

[EverettGriz]

Building an athletic center with private donated money is well enough. But there are the long-term expenses of maintenance and staffing that will affect the university's general fund for years to come. Face it, there are no really free lunches. Private money is one-time; long-term operational funds will be required each fiscal to run this place.

Well, but the same could be said for any capital project on campus.

It takes money to run a University. I don't think that's particularly news. If we want UM to remain a viable university, we've got to have a number of things, including capital expenditures.

 

[wbtfg]

Im relatively ignorant about how things are structured, or maybe Im misunderstanding the process, but the $500k donation from gsa sparked some questions.

Did they have a reserve fund for building projects? Is this coming out of scholsrship dollars that need to be backfilled from elsewhere? Did yearly donations exceed scholarship expenses?

 

[kemajic]

Building an athletic center with private donated money is well enough. But there are the long-term expenses of maintenance and staffing that will affect the university's general fund for years to come. Face it, there are no really free lunches. Private money is one-time; long-term operational funds will be required each fiscal to run this place.

Operations will come out of the AD budget, not the general fund. The cost may be no more than the makeshift way the work is done today.

 

[kemajic]

About time.. huge step for Grizzly athletics.

:lol: :lol:

The only thing this will accomplish is we now have a building, with no academic staff, for athletes to study in. Wait, what's that? ANY student can use the facility? Huh, thought we had enough study halls. But at least now we have a bulilding with the word Academic on it in front of the Adams Center.

This should not have been a priority. A weight room that is nicer than the ones recruits had in High School should be a priority.

The facility is for all student-athletes - only.

 

[NWMTGRIZ1]

Here is a concept picture of the project for those who wondered where it was going to be located.

 

[zengriz]

Here is a concept picture of the project for those who wondered where it was going to be located.

...in light of recent eventz...
...difficult to argue against...
...smarter student athletes...

... ...

 

[GrizMusician]

Here is a concept picture of the project for those who wondered where it was going to be located.

...in light of recent eventz...
...difficult to argue against...
...smarter student athletes...

... ...

+1000000000000

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jbear]

Funny! I thought the University of Montana was supposed to be an academic learning center. Wonder if any of these athletes use the library any more??? :roll:

 

[Washgrizfan1]

Now that I've done some checking, I will respond to this below post, which was in another thread several weeks ago.

"Re: Authorization for New Academic Center

by grizindabox » Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:48 am

Washgrizfan1 wrote:Realizing that a new academic center is a higher priority than a new weight room and locker rooms for Engstrom, is there any connection between the size or quality of an academic center and the quality of athletics, especially football? Does the size or quality of an academic center help attract better recruits? Does an outdated and deficient weight room and locker room negatively impact recruiting?

Will $2.5 million of private funds have a negative impact on raising private funds for a weight room and locker rooms?

Answers: no or probably not, no, yes, yes or probably yes.


The flaw with your whiny post is that the Academic Center was the priority well before Royce was a major player in any decision making at the U. You and GrizWhinyInWA seem to forget that without academics there would be no athletics. Do you really think the State and educators in the Montana University System would keep giving money to athletics if they did not make an attempt to promote the actual "student" part of student-athlete...it is call politics."

Essentially, grizindabox said that the Academic Center was a priority before Pres. Engstrom was a major decision-maker. That is not true. The Academic Center didn't become a priority until after Engstrom became the president. It was one of multiple the projections on the funding table (along with an indoor facility, the weight room, locker rooms, etc.), but it was not the priority like it became under Engstrom. Also recall that there was once a thought to turn the Canyon Club into the academic center, since it does not receive much use other than during football games and a few other events. This was not acceptable to Engstrom (and perhaps others).

 

[letsgogriz]

I helped work on that concept drawing back in 2010. We had also worked on drawings for the locker rooms and a possible addition (concept) in the south endzone parking lot. But at that time we were told the academic center would be the next thing built once funding was achieved. Before Engstrom was in charge.

 

[grizindabox]

I helped work on that concept drawing back in 2010. We had also worked on drawings for the locker rooms and a possible addition (concept) in the south endzone parking lot. But at that time we were told the academic center would be the next thing built once funding was achieved. Before Engstrom was in charge.

+1

 

[EverettGriz]

The academic center was in the works well before Engstrom was president. I personally heard Dennison discuss it publicly at a number of events.

Anyone who begrudges a university building an academic center clearly doesn't get it. It IS, after all, a university and they ARE student-athletes (note the "student" portion comes first).

 

[Washgrizfan1]

The academic center was in the works well before Engstrom was president. I personally heard Dennison discuss it publicly at a number of events.

Anyone who begrudges a university building an academic center clearly doesn't get it. It IS, after all, a university and they ARE student-athletes (note the "student" portion comes first).

Being in the works, is not the same as being no. 1 priority. No one is bedgruding a university from doing or improving an academic center. However, there are legitimate questions about whether a new academic center at this significant cost is necessary or advisable, or whether it should be no. 1 priority for the athletic department--especially given other significant needs. Looked at this one way, Pres Engstrom has jammed this down the throat of the athletic department, by requiring them to make it no. 1 priority and raise the funds all or largely from donors.

The gpa of UM athletes, including the football team, is already relatively high on a comparative basis. Athletes are graduating. Does anyone think that the new academic center will cause any significant improvement in the academics of athletes? Do you think the coaches believe it will help one ioata with recruiting? Do you think any of the football or basketball players are demanding it, or would rather his it over a new weight room? Using your language, anyone who can't understand all of these questions and concerns clearly doesn't get it.

With your reasoning, instead of building any athletic facilities, UM should just build new libraries. "After all, it is a university, and all athletes are students."

 

[Washgrizfan1]

I helped work on that concept drawing back in 2010. We had also worked on drawings for the locker rooms and a possible addition (concept) in the south endzone parking lot. But at that time we were told the academic center would be the next thing built once funding was achieved. Before Engstrom was in charge.

Not true. I had lunch with a certain former AD this week, and your statement is incorrect. There are have been multiple ideas for or including an academic center over the years. Some of the plans were based on having to move the academic center to a new location, in order to expand the weight room in its current general location. The plan you say you worked on probably actually had the building or new building for the arts people, or moving them to a new renovated location, as the no. 1 priority--not building an academic center. Doing a new south end zone building did not have the academic center as the no. 1 priority.

I see that you posted the following in 2010. It looks like you thought the locker room project could get going fairly fast. No mention of having to build a new academic center first. No mention of the weight room. Are you saying that locker room remodelling couldn't have been done before a new academic center was built?

"There is already a plan in the works for the locker rooms. They are just weighing all their options and what they want to spend. There is too much politics involved to just do things whenever they feel like it. I have seen and worked on these multiple layouts. They are trying to decide if they will move the locker rooms or just remodel them."

 

[EverettGriz]

The academic center was in the works well before Engstrom was president. I personally heard Dennison discuss it publicly at a number of events.

Anyone who begrudges a university building an academic center clearly doesn't get it. It IS, after all, a university and they ARE student-athletes (note the "student" portion comes first).

Being in the works, is not the same as being no. 1 priority. No one is bedgruding a university from doing or improving an academic center. However, there are legitimate questions about whether a new academic center at this significant cost is necessary or advisable, or whether it should be no. 1 priority for the athletic department--especially given other significant needs. Looked at this one way, Pres Engstrom has jammed this down the throat of the athletic department, by requiring them to make it no. 1 priority and raise the funds all or largely from donors.

The gpa of UM athletes, including the football team, is already relatively high on a comparative basis. Athletes are graduating. Does anyone think that the new academic center will cause any significant improvement in the academics of athletes? Do you think the coaches believe it will help one ioata with recruiting? Do you think any of the football or basketball players are demanding it, or would rather his it over a new weight room? Using your language, anyone who can't understand all of these questions and concerns clearly doesn't get it.

With your reasoning, instead of building any athletic facilities, UM should just build new libraries. "After all, it is a university, and all athletes are students."

Clearly, nothing nor no one will change your mind.

But consider this: Fund raising for the locker room/weight room is taking place simultaneously with the academic center. Yet donors saw fit to fund the academic center first. Why? Because it IS important. You don't like Engstrom; that's clear. But this argument is ridiculous.

And yes, absolutely EVERY coach on campus feels the center will help with recruiting and also will give them more time with the student-athletes. But they also understand the big picture: it's a university. It's not ALL about recruiting.

 

[Washgrizfan1]

The academic center was in the works well before Engstrom was president. I personally heard Dennison discuss it publicly at a number of events.

Anyone who begrudges a university building an academic center clearly doesn't get it. It IS, after all, a university and they ARE student-athletes (note the "student" portion comes first).

Being in the works, is not the same as being no. 1 priority. No one is bedgruding a university from doing or improving an academic center. However, there are legitimate questions about whether a new academic center at this significant cost is necessary or advisable, or whether it should be no. 1 priority for the athletic department--especially given other significant needs. Looked at this one way, Pres Engstrom has jammed this down the throat of the athletic department, by requiring them to make it no. 1 priority and raise the funds all or largely from donors.

The gpa of UM athletes, including the football team, is already relatively high on a comparative basis. Athletes are graduating. Does anyone think that the new academic center will cause any significant improvement in the academics of athletes? Do you think the coaches believe it will help one ioata with recruiting? Do you think any of the football or basketball players are demanding it, or would rather his it over a new weight room? Using your language, anyone who can't understand all of these questions and concerns clearly doesn't get it.

With your reasoning, instead of building any athletic facilities, UM should just build new libraries. "After all, it is a university, and all athletes are students."

Clearly, nothing nor no one will change your mind.

But consider this: Fund raising for the locker room/weight room is taking place simultaneously with the academic center. Yet donors saw fit to fund the academic center first. Why? Because it IS important. You don't like Engstrom; that's clear. But this argument is ridiculous.

And yes, absolutely EVERY coach on campus feels the center will help with recruiting and also will give them more time with the student-athletes. But they also understand the big picture: it's a university. It's not ALL about recruiting.

I will take what the former athletic director says over what you say anytime. The fund-raising was done initially as fund-raising for facilities--not for a specific project. It's not true that the donors saw fit to fund the academic center first. If donors got to chose, the weight room and locker rooms would be done first. Some donors and potential donors, of which I am one, were not told what the money would be used for when they were contacted. Over time, once the academic center became the no. 1 priority, discussions were had with larger donors. Some said they would not donate for the academic center. Some said they preferred to donate for the academic center. AD Haslam obviously believes there are enough donors willing to fund the academic center.

No, it's not true that coaches (of the major sports) believe the academic center will help recruiting. In fact, that is absolutely false. They would much rather have weight and locker rooms, which would have significantly with recruiting. Yes, it's a university. If the president wants a fancy academic center done first, and won't approve other projects deemed to be much more important by coaches, then the president is going to get his way.

 

[WaGriz4life]

The academic center was in the works well before Engstrom was president. I personally heard Dennison discuss it publicly at a number of events.

Anyone who begrudges a university building an academic center clearly doesn't get it. It IS, after all, a university and they ARE student-athletes (note the "student" portion comes first).

Being in the works, is not the same as being no. 1 priority. No one is bedgruding a university from doing or improving an academic center. However, there are legitimate questions about whether a new academic center at this significant cost is necessary or advisable, or whether it should be no. 1 priority for the athletic department--especially given other significant needs. Looked at this one way, Pres Engstrom has jammed this down the throat of the athletic department, by requiring them to make it no. 1 priority and raise the funds all or largely from donors.

The gpa of UM athletes, including the football team, is already relatively high on a comparative basis. Athletes are graduating. Does anyone think that the new academic center will cause any significant improvement in the academics of athletes? Do you think the coaches believe it will help one ioata with recruiting? Do you think any of the football or basketball players are demanding it, or would rather his it over a new weight room? Using your language, anyone who can't understand all of these questions and concerns clearly doesn't get it.

With your reasoning, instead of building any athletic facilities, UM should just build new libraries. "After all, it is a university, and all athletes are students."

Clearly, nothing nor no one will change your mind.

But consider this: Fund raising for the locker room/weight room is taking place simultaneously with the academic center. Yet donors saw fit to fund the academic center first. Why? Because it IS important. You don't like Engstrom; that's clear. But this argument is ridiculous.

And yes, absolutely EVERY coach on campus feels the center will help with recruiting and also will give them more time with the student-athletes. But they also understand the big picture: it's a university. It's not ALL about recruiting.

I will take what the former athletic director says over what you say anytime. The fund-raising was done initially as fund-raising for facilities--not for a specific project. It's not true that the donors saw fit to fund the academic center first. If donors got to chose, the weight room and locker rooms would be done first. Some donors and potential donors, of which I am one, were not told what the money would be used for when they were contacted. Over time, once the academic center became the no. 1 priority, discussions were had with larger donors. Some said they would not donate for the academic center. Some said they preferred to donate for the academic center. AD Haslam obviously believes there are enough donors willing to fund the academic center.

No, it's not true that coaches (of the major sports) believe the academic center will help recruiting. In fact, that is absolutely false. They would much rather have weight and locker rooms, which would have significantly with recruiting. Yes, it's a university. If the president wants a fancy academic center done first, and won't approve other projects deemed to be much more important by coaches, then the president is going to get his way.

BINGO.

The Academic Center will not help students athletes get better grades nor will it help in recruting. You are exactly right that the coaches think weight room should be priority #1

 

[grizindabox]

Being in the works, is not the same as being no. 1 priority. No one is bedgruding a university from doing or improving an academic center. However, there are legitimate questions about whether a new academic center at this significant cost is necessary or advisable, or whether it should be no. 1 priority for the athletic department--especially given other significant needs. Looked at this one way, Pres Engstrom has jammed this down the throat of the athletic department, by requiring them to make it no. 1 priority and raise the funds all or largely from donors.

The gpa of UM athletes, including the football team, is already relatively high on a comparative basis. Athletes are graduating. Does anyone think that the new academic center will cause any significant improvement in the academics of athletes? Do you think the coaches believe it will help one ioata with recruiting? Do you think any of the football or basketball players are demanding it, or would rather his it over a new weight room? Using your language, anyone who can't understand all of these questions and concerns clearly doesn't get it.

With your reasoning, instead of building any athletic facilities, UM should just build new libraries. "After all, it is a university, and all athletes are students."

Clearly, nothing nor no one will change your mind.

But consider this: Fund raising for the locker room/weight room is taking place simultaneously with the academic center. Yet donors saw fit to fund the academic center first. Why? Because it IS important. You don't like Engstrom; that's clear. But this argument is ridiculous.

And yes, absolutely EVERY coach on campus feels the center will help with recruiting and also will give them more time with the student-athletes. But they also understand the big picture: it's a university. It's not ALL about recruiting.

I will take what the former athletic director says over what you say anytime. The fund-raising was done initially as fund-raising for facilities--not for a specific project. It's not true that the donors saw fit to fund the academic center first. If donors got to chose, the weight room and locker rooms would be done first. Some donors and potential donors, of which I am one, were not told what the money would be used for when they were contacted. Over time, once the academic center became the no. 1 priority, discussions were had with larger donors. Some said they would not donate for the academic center. Some said they preferred to donate for the academic center. AD Haslam obviously believes there are enough donors willing to fund the academic center.

No, it's not true that coaches (of the major sports) believe the academic center will help recruiting. In fact, that is absolutely false. They would much rather have weight and locker rooms, which would have significantly with recruiting. Yes, it's a university. If the president wants a fancy academic center done first, and won't approve other projects deemed to be much more important by coaches, then the president is going to get his way.

BINGO.

The Academic Center will not help students athletes get better grades nor will it help in recruting. You are exactly right that the coaches think weight room should be priority #1

But it boils down to though is that the coaches and athletic department are not the ones that get to decide...that should surprise no one. What better way to get athletic projects done than to advertise the commitment to academics by the department. It is all a political game.

 

[uofmman1122]

So is it true that it's open and available for any student to use?

If so, totally agree with the people saying the weight rooms/locker rooms should have been done first. If it's not specifically for student athletes, then it kind of defeats the whole point in having it, no? :?