• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

MSU asking state for additional $$

I don't know what the big deal is. My take is that it is a good approach by President Cruzado. I am sure there will be some excellent proposals from the various departments. It is a very creative approach to accomplishing the school's srtategic objectives and spending money wisely.

I don't see anything wrong with it being discussed on here. It appears though, there is a lot of mis-understanding about this money and how and why it was being made available. I am sure UM could do the same thing. It seems to make sense.
 
But, BS33, you do realize the opportunity costs involved, correct? This isn't "extra" money. It's money that will have to be taken out of another department's budget. If that's the right decision, then so be it. But I would think many taxpayers would prefer to see the money stay in the library, or to pay professor's salaries.
 
Silvertip said:
Raise the price of a ticket to watch a Monmouth (?) play. Obviously MSU has watched and learned from UM's established bait and switch philosophy. :thumb:
Click to expand...

No shit. We have 6 season seats in the gold section. With booster fee and ticket increases we will pay 74.66 per seat, per game. 75 bucks a game to watch the frickin Cats? Have you seen our schedule? What a frickin joke. The only home games worth a shit are nau and the griz. This bullshit is getting old. Now I totally understand what my griz friends have been talking about. Keep feeding us season ticket holders bullshit games and it's time to watch from the cheap seats. Budget that fields. Oh, try getting a basketball team too. Maybe we wounldn't be so broke.
 
Here is the first article on the proposals with a little on what athletics proposed. No big headline and 0 comments. Put athletics wanting money in the headline and bingo. You get the same 6 or so guys that comment against athletics every chance they get. I'm sure the missoulian has the same problem.

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/montana_state_university/article_31e1295c-7cb6-11e2-9916-001a4bcf887a.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
I am sure that MSU's strategic goals and objectives are all approved by the BOR. President Cruzado has the responsiblity to make sure they get accomplished in the most efficient manner. Getting 104 proposals to pick from, I think is a creative way to to help get this accomplished with the best use of funds.

I would say that salary increases are handled seperately from this pool of money. Also, I would think all departments basic budgets are taken into consideration when alllocations are made. Again, it appears to be a very creative way of making sure your making the most efficient and effective use of money.
 
Back to the original post:

Student athletes have a 77 percent graduation rate, a 3.17 grade point average, rank No. 1 in the Big Sky conference for academic progress rate and volunteered more than 4,000 hours in the community last year. While teams have won many championships, MSU earned Coach of the Year honors in football and regional Athletic Director of the Year for Fields.

Hmmmmm. I am pretty sure that was UM that led the BSC in athletic dept GPA. But note the subtle caveat "progress rate". If your selling a load of manure be sure to get the shit together. BTW don't expect a vote from Pat Williams, he hates football.
 
I am sure that MSU's strategic goals and objectives are all approved by the BOR
Click to expand...

Umm, no. The Regents aren't involved at that level of decision-making. That's what the university's administration is for.

I would say that salary increases are handled seperately from this pool of money
Click to expand...

This isn't a separate and distinct "pool" of money. There's only one pool. It's the total amount allocated to msu. And this money comes from that. So to take it and put it toward athletics means that an educational department necessarily has to do with less. In the biz, we call that an "opportunity cost".

it appears to be a very creative way of making sure your making the most efficient and effective use of money.
Click to expand...

It appears to be "budgeting" to me.


And Phat, your post was pretty damn funny. And KMD, your point is certainly well taken also. Put "athletics" in a story and all the vermin come out of the woodwork. Missoula understands that all too well!
 
Pat Williams is not involved in this. This is an internal thing at MSU. President Cruzado has the final say on which of the 39 finalist proposals get funded.
 
Not a happy thought, and it flies in the face with all of the poor mouthing coming out of the athletic departments in Missoula and Bozeman, but until fans finally decide to keep their wallets in their hip pocket they're going to continue getting Alpo quality opponents when they're paying for filet. Look around and see what some FBS teams charge for fans to see better competition...on second thought don't. You'll want to puke. We paid $70 a ticket to see a Georgia home game against the Vols last September. The SEC atmosphere alone is worth more than the cost of the ticket. Monmouth?... Panhandle State?... MT fans deserve one hell of a lot better. But they'll have to get up on their hind legs first...
 
grizbrokebacker1 said:
Apparently Everett has forgotten about the $1 million UM athletic budget shortfall of 2003-2004. Not that the past matters or anything.
Click to expand...

Budget shortfall, sounds like an administrative problem. MSU must have Obama for an advisor, get more tax money! Wrong. Its about taking financial responsibility. Someone has to take the responsibility, heads will have to roll. The cats dodging NDSU will look like the reason for atonement when you have to schedule body bag games with the big boys for a few years. In the mean, being that Texas is the recruiting promised land for the cats, y'all will have to sniff around Texas,Texas A & M, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston, and Baylor for a while, if you can get them to take you. You may even have to try the likes of 'Bama and LSU. Big bucks games. Think of the recruiting possibilities. You could be the modern day Fresno State, anyone, anywhere, anytime.
Maybe by 2015 your budget will be back in the black and you can restart some programs and positions axed, and start rehiring again.
 
EverettGriz said:
I am sure that MSU's strategic goals and objectives are all approved by the BOR
Click to expand...

Umm, no. The Regents aren't involved at that level of decision-making. That's what the university's administration is for.

I would say that salary increases are handled seperately from this pool of money
Click to expand...

This isn't a separate and distinct "pool" of money. There's only one pool. It's the total amount allocated to msu. And this money comes from that. So to take it and put it toward athletics means that an educational department necessarily has to do with less. In the biz, we call that an "opportunity cost".

it appears to be a very creative way of making sure your making the most efficient and effective use of money.
Click to expand...

It appears to be "budgeting" to me.


And Phat, your post was pretty damn funny. And KMD, your point is certainly well taken also. Put "athletics" in a story and all the vermin come out of the woodwork. Missoula understands that all too well!
Click to expand...

I would think that when MSU & UM go to the Regents for funding, they have to present their strategic goals and objectives to justify the amount (budget).

Yes your right, that money for salary increases is all in one pot with the total. But, I am sure they have that built in before making this $2 million available for allocation. Nowhere was it mentioned that all the $2million would go to one department. I understand the 104 proposals were narrowed down to 39 finalists. Not even all of the final 39 will get money. It depends what they decide are the best proposals. The way I understand is that some may only get partial funding. Like the Atheltic Dept. proposal is broken down into different components. They may fund one but not the others or none at all. Yes, it is budgeting. But, getting all these ideas from all over the University is a creative way to effectively budget money. Yes, in any budget process some deptartments end up with less but that is usually because there was a more effective or efficient use of that money somewhere else.
 
OptimusPrime said:
These threads are kinda like throwing paper airplanes into the air. You let go and for a moment think "It has a chance to really do something!" Then it takes a hard left suddenly and crashes into a wall.
Over/under 8 pages on this....?
Click to expand...

My guess is over 8 because it is off day for the trial, signing day is over, no spring ball, no word from the DOJ, DOE, or NCAA, this is egriz and we are dysfuntional, and I just got one post closer to 8 pages. :D
 
KoolMoeDee said:
IF UM had 2 million set aside for "strategic goals" and asked anybody and everybody for proposals. I guarantee UM athletics would have been in the running for a piece of the pie.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. UM athletics is popular around the state. On campus, not so much. ASUM and the students will vote against athletics at all costs, even if they get more seats at the stadium out of it. That is why the last expansion was scaled back. Don't even get me started on what the majority of the faculty think about it. For decades it has been the other way around. Any profit from football has been raided by Main Hall to fund everything else on campus.
 
I would think that when MSU & UM go to the Regents for funding, they have to present their strategic goals and objectives to justify the amount (budget).
Click to expand...

And, you'd be wrong.

Funding in Montana is -- as I stated in an earlier post -- based purely and entirely on FTE (Full Time Equivalent) head count.
 
So what happens when money is allocated for a school based on FTE, and enrollment decreases by 500?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
 
Vitamin R said:
So what happens when money is allocated for a school based on FTE, and enrollment decreases by 500?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

Look at the Missoulian or Kaiman archives and it will show a budget shortfall for the University of Montana this year with cuts in the offing.
 
The bottom line is very few women sports make money, but cost a shit ton. Now I love basketball. Men and womens. So we keep that. Men and womens track? Oh hell no. Big waste. Womens soccer and golf? Money loser! Womens volleyball? Hell yes. Nothing says hot ass like those uni's. Rodeo? This is Montana so, yes. Then theres hockey if your in the right state. Not here in Montana, It's just not a money maker. Ask my neighbors the Martels. Lost their ass in the hockey business. They never wanted to be in it, in the first place. Long story. So there we have it. Football, mens, womens basketball and rodeo. Oh, and womens volleyball. So so hot. Screw funding the rest of the so called sports. Budget fixed. Title X? That's why we keep volleyball. X rated in my mind and the number of sports are equal. The numbers don't match? Add Volleyball A,B,C and D squads. You better be damn hot to be on the last three teams. Get the f..k out of my office fields. I have a handle on this whole mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top