UNLV - 16 Wins in 4 years

[PlayerRep]

No, a donation is not just a gift to charity, etc. Donations are made to colleges, which aren't charities, nor humanitarian or benefit a cause. Your wiki definition looks like it covers only charitable donations. Donations, or contributions,are made to political candidates. In the old days, they used to be tax deductible.

Also, even in your wiki definition, I see nothing that says that the donation can't buy the donor influence over the use of the funds.

Donations to universities and colleges often come with lots of strings attached. To fund the particular building or the particular school. Now, schools don't have to accept the donations, and sometimes don't, but, again, big donations from bigger donors frequently come with strings attached.

In the case of big athletic donors, if the school doesn't do what the donor would like, then the donor tends to quit donating. When most of a school's major donors are saying it's time to get a new coach, then a school has to listen. Also, an AD who doesn't listen, then subjects himself to having the donors go the president and getting the AD fired. It's happened before. It happened at Oregon some time back.

It's the way the world works. If most or a lot of UM's bigger donors wanted a coaching change, what do you think would have happened if Haslam had refused. Do you not think UM's funding would decrease? Where would funding for UM's athletics come from? It would not come from academics or the board of regents or the State.

Do you donate to causes and things that you disagree with?

Wiki was the first I grabbed, what you describe is a legal bribe in my opinion per "strings attached". As I said that is what is wrong with college athletics. I can understand the tax deduction, but to say, 'you don't get my money unless you do this, this and this" is slimy to me.

Donations should be because you want to donate, or have a belief in something or someone, not because you insist on sticking your nose into something that is none of your business, just because you have money.

I donate to many different causes, and yes some I don't agree with but a friend or family member may have asked me to. Never in my life, has any donation come with any stipulation, and if I won the lottery tomorrow, and had millions to donate, it would not come with any at that point either.

My moral character is just slightly more ethical then the big money donors that have "strings attached".

Do you think it was wrong for Denny Washington to say he would build the new stadium, but it would have to be named after him?

With many athletic donations, it's not, "I won't donate unless you do this or that". It's, "If you don't change coaches, I'm not donating anymore".

You remind me of some literals who seem to think that rich people should pay more in taxes to support what the liberals want done, or to support the liberal person and his type. Easy for non or low taxpayers to say.

I think it's funny that you seem to think that people should money should just give large amounts of money to causes or institutions, and not be concerned how their money is used. In my experience, it almost never works that way.

 

[ordigger]

No, a donation is not just a gift to charity, etc. Donations are made to colleges, which aren't charities, nor humanitarian or benefit a cause. Your wiki definition looks like it covers only charitable donations. Donations, or contributions,are made to political candidates. In the old days, they used to be tax deductible.

Also, even in your wiki definition, I see nothing that says that the donation can't buy the donor influence over the use of the funds.

Donations to universities and colleges often come with lots of strings attached. To fund the particular building or the particular school. Now, schools don't have to accept the donations, and sometimes don't, but, again, big donations from bigger donors frequently come with strings attached.

In the case of big athletic donors, if the school doesn't do what the donor would like, then the donor tends to quit donating. When most of a school's major donors are saying it's time to get a new coach, then a school has to listen. Also, an AD who doesn't listen, then subjects himself to having the donors go the president and getting the AD fired. It's happened before. It happened at Oregon some time back.

It's the way the world works. If most or a lot of UM's bigger donors wanted a coaching change, what do you think would have happened if Haslam had refused. Do you not think UM's funding would decrease? Where would funding for UM's athletics come from? It would not come from academics or the board of regents or the State.

Do you donate to causes and things that you disagree with?

Wiki was the first I grabbed, what you describe is a legal bribe in my opinion per "strings attached". As I said that is what is wrong with college athletics. I can understand the tax deduction, but to say, 'you don't get my money unless you do this, this and this" is slimy to me.

Donations should be because you want to donate, or have a belief in something or someone, not because you insist on sticking your nose into something that is none of your business, just because you have money.

I donate to many different causes, and yes some I don't agree with but a friend or family member may have asked me to. Never in my life, has any donation come with any stipulation, and if I won the lottery tomorrow, and had millions to donate, it would not come with any at that point either.

My moral character is just slightly more ethical then the big money donors that have "strings attached".

Do you think it was wrong for Denny Washington to say he would build the new stadium, but it would have to be named after him?

With many athletic donations, it's not, "I won't donate unless you do this or that". It's, "If you don't change coaches, I'm not donating anymore".

You remind me of some literals who seem to think that rich people should pay more in taxes to support what the liberals want done, or to support the liberal person and his type. Easy for non or low taxpayers to say.

I think it's funny that you seem to think that people should money should just give large amounts of money to causes or institutions, and not be concerned how their money is used. In my experience, it almost never works that way.

There is a difference between being concerned how your money is used, and dictating how to run a college football team. I'm anything but a liberal, they are as sleezy as conservatives. Both bad for this country, they point fingers, pound their chests, and say listen to me...without tolerance for the other side.

And yes, Denny Washington should not have dictated the stadium should be named after him. He could donate, have a plaque put up somewhere thanking him, but insisting something is named after him tells me all I need to know about that persons character - if indeed that is what was done. For some reason, I thought he DID NOT want it named after him, but others insisted.

 

[PlayerRep]

AD's and fundraisers are out courting big donors and big potential donors all the time. This is how money gets raised. AD's invite these donors to weigh in on what's going on. To make suggestions.

Personally, I see no reason that an administrator, i.e. an AD, should make all the decisions. Especially one that never played the game. What does a first time AD know about hiring football coaches? AD's get advice and need to get advice. They need to at least listen to the people who are paying the bills.

 

[ordigger]

AD's and fundraisers are out courting big donors and big potential donors all the time. This is how money gets raised. AD's invite these donors to weigh in on what's going on. To make suggestions.

Personally, I see no reason that an administrator, i.e. an AD, should make all the decisions. Especially one that never played the game. What does a first time AD know about hiring football coaches? AD's get advice and need to get advice. They need to at least listen to the people who are paying the bills.

That is wrong on so many levels. Thats the kind of thinking that leads to booster issues...it starts with hot dogs.

And I'm not saying this is a Griz problem, its a college sports problem. Being in Oklahoma I see what T Boone Pickens does for OSU. Just my opinion

 

[AllWeatherFan]

You remind me of some literals who seem to think that rich people should pay more in taxes to support what the liberals want done, or to support the liberal person and his type. Easy for non or low taxpayers to say.

I am a recovering literal. I have no idea what you mean.

 

[ilovethecats]

AD's and fundraisers are out courting big donors and big potential donors all the time. This is how money gets raised. AD's invite these donors to weigh in on what's going on. To make suggestions.

Personally, I see no reason that an administrator, i.e. an AD, should make all the decisions. Especially one that never played the game. What does a first time AD know about hiring football coaches? AD's get advice and need to get advice. They need to at least listen to the people who are paying the bills.

That is wrong on so many levels. Thats the kind of thinking that leads to booster issues...it starts with hot dogs.

And I'm not saying this is a Griz problem, its a college sports problem. Being in Oklahoma I see what T Boone Pickens does for OSU. Just my opinion

I understand where you’re coming from. But no one is forcing these schools to take any money from anyone. Aren’t the schools then unethical for taking the money?

It’s pretty simple. If a big time donor offers to give millions of dollars but has some requests, you either take the money and honor the requests or simply say no thank you.

It’s like having your cake and eating it too. Hard to brag so much about your amazing facilities on one hand but then call it unethical that big boosters who gave you those facilities have major pull when decisions are being made.

 

[ordigger]

AD's and fundraisers are out courting big donors and big potential donors all the time. This is how money gets raised. AD's invite these donors to weigh in on what's going on. To make suggestions.

Personally, I see no reason that an administrator, i.e. an AD, should make all the decisions. Especially one that never played the game. What does a first time AD know about hiring football coaches? AD's get advice and need to get advice. They need to at least listen to the people who are paying the bills.

That is wrong on so many levels. Thats the kind of thinking that leads to booster issues...it starts with hot dogs.

And I'm not saying this is a Griz problem, its a college sports problem. Being in Oklahoma I see what T Boone Pickens does for OSU. Just my opinion

I understand where you’re coming from. But no one is forcing these schools to take any money from anyone. Aren’t the schools then unethical for taking the money?

It’s pretty simple. If a big time donor offers to give millions of dollars but has some requests, you either take the money and honor the requests or simply say no thank you.

It’s like having your cake and eating it too. Hard to brag so much about your amazing facilities on one hand but then call it unethical that big boosters who gave you those facilities have major pull when decisions are being made.

Which makes it a bribe. Accept the money. Request nothing. School can decide if and how they wish to honor the donor.

 

[ilovethecats]

AD's and fundraisers are out courting big donors and big potential donors all the time. This is how money gets raised. AD's invite these donors to weigh in on what's going on. To make suggestions.

Personally, I see no reason that an administrator, i.e. an AD, should make all the decisions. Especially one that never played the game. What does a first time AD know about hiring football coaches? AD's get advice and need to get advice. They need to at least listen to the people who are paying the bills.

That is wrong on so many levels. Thats the kind of thinking that leads to booster issues...it starts with hot dogs.

And I'm not saying this is a Griz problem, its a college sports problem. Being in Oklahoma I see what T Boone Pickens does for OSU. Just my opinion

I understand where you’re coming from. But no one is forcing these schools to take any money from anyone. Aren’t the schools then unethical for taking the money?

It’s pretty simple. If a big time donor offers to give millions of dollars but has some requests, you either take the money and honor the requests or simply say no thank you.

It’s like having your cake and eating it too. Hard to brag so much about your amazing facilities on one hand but then call it unethical that big boosters who gave you those facilities have major pull when decisions are being made.

Which makes it a bribe. Accept the money. Request nothing. School can decide if and how they wish to honor the donor.

In a perfect world yes. Anonymous donors or even people you know would hand over millions while not wanting a single thing in return. That’d be ideal for every school in the country. But not realistic.

I will agree that much of this depends on how straight forward the donor is from the beginning. Fundraising is difficult. But there is nothing worse then getting a donation of any size and then down the road these donors are making demands with their sense of entitlement. That happens and it bothers me.

But if I’m raising money and someone approaches me and says they’d love to give me 3 million if I can do this, this, this and this.....at that point I feel the responsibility is on me. If I feel their demands make it feel like a bribe or unethical than I simply turn the money down. I find money in other places where there are no strings attached. That is always the right of anyone seeking donations.

 

[bigkid]

I honestly believe that IRS would have an issue with a tax deductible “donation” with strings attached. I believe that’s how we ended up with Majestic Plaza.

 

[PlayerRep]

I honestly believe that IRS would have an issue with a tax deductible “donation” with strings attached. I believe that’s how we ended up with Majestic Plaza.

The IRS rule is that the donor cannot receive a benefit from the donation. Don't think there are any problems with strings attached, if there is not benefit to the donor. A benefit is not the strings. The name on the building is not a prohibited benefit.

 

[PlayerRep]

AD's and fundraisers are out courting big donors and big potential donors all the time. This is how money gets raised. AD's invite these donors to weigh in on what's going on. To make suggestions.

Personally, I see no reason that an administrator, i.e. an AD, should make all the decisions. Especially one that never played the game. What does a first time AD know about hiring football coaches? AD's get advice and need to get advice. They need to at least listen to the people who are paying the bills.

That is wrong on so many levels. Thats the kind of thinking that leads to booster issues...it starts with hot dogs.

And I'm not saying this is a Griz problem, its a college sports problem. Being in Oklahoma I see what T Boone Pickens does for OSU. Just my opinion

I understand where you’re coming from. But no one is forcing these schools to take any money from anyone. Aren’t the schools then unethical for taking the money?

It’s pretty simple. If a big time donor offers to give millions of dollars but has some requests, you either take the money and honor the requests or simply say no thank you.

It’s like having your cake and eating it too. Hard to brag so much about your amazing facilities on one hand but then call it unethical that big boosters who gave you those facilities have major pull when decisions are being made.

Which makes it a bribe. Accept the money. Request nothing. School can decide if and how they wish to honor the donor.

Sorry, it's not a bribe. A bribe involves things like an elected official doing something in his official capacity due to the money/thing given.

"bribe

1. persuade (someone) to act in one's favor, typically illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement: "an undercover agent bribed the judge into giving a lenient sentence"

Your view is that it's a bribe to give the neighbor kid $20 to mow your lawn.

 

[PlayerRep]

AD's and fundraisers are out courting big donors and big potential donors all the time. This is how money gets raised. AD's invite these donors to weigh in on what's going on. To make suggestions.

Personally, I see no reason that an administrator, i.e. an AD, should make all the decisions. Especially one that never played the game. What does a first time AD know about hiring football coaches? AD's get advice and need to get advice. They need to at least listen to the people who are paying the bills.

That is wrong on so many levels. Thats the kind of thinking that leads to booster issues...it starts with hot dogs.

And I'm not saying this is a Griz problem, its a college sports problem. Being in Oklahoma I see what T Boone Pickens does for OSU. Just my opinion

I understand where you’re coming from. But no one is forcing these schools to take any money from anyone. Aren’t the schools then unethical for taking the money?

It’s pretty simple. If a big time donor offers to give millions of dollars but has some requests, you either take the money and honor the requests or simply say no thank you.

It’s like having your cake and eating it too. Hard to brag so much about your amazing facilities on one hand but then call it unethical that big boosters who gave you those facilities have major pull when decisions are being made.

I agree. And, again, AD's often, or sometimes, go to their major donors to run things by them or ask for advice.

I agree that major boosters don't and shouldn't run athletic departments. However, it is naive to think that an AD and athletic department can raise the necessary funds without keeping major donors happy, if possible, and sometimes having to take suggestions from major donors. AD's and universities, including presidents, have to have integrity and strength too. Universities often turn down donors, or can't reach agreement with them.

In the case of the recent coaching change, it's not like only the major UM donors wanted a change. My impression is that the vast majority of fans also wanted change. And, it's not that some major donors didn't go over the AD's head, at least in making their recommendations for their choice for replacement.

 

[ordigger]

That is wrong on so many levels. Thats the kind of thinking that leads to booster issues...it starts with hot dogs.

And I'm not saying this is a Griz problem, its a college sports problem. Being in Oklahoma I see what T Boone Pickens does for OSU. Just my opinion

I understand where you’re coming from. But no one is forcing these schools to take any money from anyone. Aren’t the schools then unethical for taking the money?

It’s pretty simple. If a big time donor offers to give millions of dollars but has some requests, you either take the money and honor the requests or simply say no thank you.

It’s like having your cake and eating it too. Hard to brag so much about your amazing facilities on one hand but then call it unethical that big boosters who gave you those facilities have major pull when decisions are being made.

Which makes it a bribe. Accept the money. Request nothing. School can decide if and how they wish to honor the donor.

Sorry, it's not a bribe. A bribe involves things like an elected official doing something in his official capacity due to the money/thing given.

"bribe

1. persuade (someone) to act in one's favor, typically illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement: "an undercover agent bribed the judge into giving a lenient sentence"

Your view is that it's a bribe to give the neighbor kid $20 to mow your lawn.

Definition of bribe...."persuade someone to act in one's favor". That pretty much defines what I'm talking about. It's legal though.

And your last statement is worse. Payment for services rendered. Donating to a school, and then insisting on being involved in administrative decisions are not the same thing. Not even close.

 

[PlayerRep]

I understand where you’re coming from. But no one is forcing these schools to take any money from anyone. Aren’t the schools then unethical for taking the money?

It’s pretty simple. If a big time donor offers to give millions of dollars but has some requests, you either take the money and honor the requests or simply say no thank you.

It’s like having your cake and eating it too. Hard to brag so much about your amazing facilities on one hand but then call it unethical that big boosters who gave you those facilities have major pull when decisions are being made.

Which makes it a bribe. Accept the money. Request nothing. School can decide if and how they wish to honor the donor.

Sorry, it's not a bribe. A bribe involves things like an elected official doing something in his official capacity due to the money/thing given.

"bribe

1. persuade (someone) to act in one's favor, typically illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement: "an undercover agent bribed the judge into giving a lenient sentence"

Your view is that it's a bribe to give the neighbor kid $20 to mow your lawn.

Definition of bribe...."persuade someone to act in one's favor". That pretty much defines what I'm talking about. It's legal though.

And your last statement is worse. Payment for services rendered. Donating to a school, and then insisting on being involved in administrative decisions are not the same thing. Not even close.

"persuade (someone) to act in one's favor, typically illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement". You can't ignore the illegally or dishonestly.

Some people now refer to "investing" in a school, at least with donations to the academic side. Some people think too many universities are no longer good investments, because they don't use the money wisely, strategically and with purpose; essentially waste too many funds; and are too liberal.

"Bill Gates Is Investing More than a Billion Dollars in Public Schools"

"The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has invested at least some $3.4 billion already toward the cause."

http://fortune.com/2017/10/20/bill-gates-public-schools-investment/

From UM Capital Campaign website:

"Enhance opportunity and access. At UM, a little generosity goes a long way. A modest investment in a student can lead to great returns."

From a website:

"Why Donors Invest
No matter what inspires you to support Washburn Center, your gift will have lasting impact."

"Washburn Center is a wise investment in our community’s social and economic future. When children receive early mental health intervention, they are less likely to fail academically or enter the juvenile justice system."