University in transition: Teams to plan future for UL

[NewsCopy]

The teams of UL and community stakeholders hand-picked to help the university through its transition to a new president will hold their first meeting this week. UL's incoming president, Joseph Savoie, will meet with the transition team members Thursday at the Alumni Center. The teams will examine the key issue areas addressed in an institutional review of the university made by a consultant before a new president was named. The consultant and his review team made 36 recommendations ranging from training students and faculty in the use of the online course management software to more complex issues like whether or not the university's football program can afford to continue to compete at its current Division I-A status. The advisory teams will focus on key areas identified in the review: academic and faculty, economic development and research; student issues; university advancement; athletics; and facilities and property. The rest of the story Marsha Sills msills@theadvertiser.com

[DestinCajun]

The consultant and his review team made 36 recommendations

What are they?

[Tripple Threat]

"whether or not the university's football program can afford to continue to compete at its current Division I-A status."

This one caught my eye.How much do pull they have?

[rhineaux]

_ "whether or not the university's football program can afford to continue to compete at its current Division I-A status."

This one caught my eye.How much do pull they have? _

I noticed this little gem. wierd how of all the 36 different issues that were brought up, Marsha Sills decided to use that one.

Actually, the entire article seemed like a reprint of something that was printed when the review was completed.

[ulforlife]

I noticed this little gem. wierd how of all the 36 different issues that were brought up, Marsha Sills decided to use that one.

lame

she needs to worry about other things

[shof]

I think that its just a "hot button" topic; hence why that particular issue was printed. I thought I also heard from the administration (whether Savoie during the interview process, or others) after the review that moving "down" was not an option.

[HoustonCajun]

_ I think that its just a "hot button" topic; hence why that particular issue was printed. I thought I also heard from the administration (whether Savoie during the interview process, or others) after the review that moving "down" was not an option. _

Many have opined that a major priorit is a campus beautification project and taking care of older buildings. I was just looking at the ULM Scout website and they have pictures of their "Reclaiming the Campus" photos and what their President has done over the past 2-3 years to beautify their campus. And, I have to say it is a very attractive campus with the bayou running through it. Their President took over with an athletic department deficit, run-down buildings, the school nearing fiscal insolvency and in just a few short years turned things around greatly. Even football is beating teams like Alabama while we lose to McNeese. It is time for a new President and Dr. S has a full plate in front of him. But, the challenges are exciting with a magical pot at the end of the rainbow. It is truly time for this "sleeping giant" to awaken as we have been saying now for some 30 years. It is now or never for UL. I, for one, cannot wait for him to take over, announce new initiatives, and turn this whole thing around. I suspect Scott Farmer is waiting for Dr. S as well so that all of the new athletic initiatives can be announced under Dr. S' leadership, which is as it should be.

[DestinCajun]

_ I think that its just a "hot button" topic; hence why that particular issue was printed. I thought I also heard from the administration (whether Savoie during the interview process, or others) after the review that moving "down" was not an option. _

Is there a link somewhere to the actual report including the 36 recommendations? I would prefer to read it myself rather than read what was written about it by someone else.

[Zeebart21]

Is there a link somewhere to the actual report including the 36 recommendations? I would prefer to read it myself rather than read what was written about it by someone else.

Staff or Wire should have written this article. Those dudes can bring it.

Z

[DaddyCajun]

_ Many have opined that a major priorit is a campus beautification project and taking care of older buildings. I was just looking at the ULM Scout website and they have pictures of their "Reclaiming the Campus" photos and what their President has done over the past 2-3 years to beautify their campus. And, I have to say it is a very attractive campus with the bayou running through it. Their President took over with an athletic department deficit, run-down buildings, the school nearing fiscal insolvency and in just a few short years turned things around greatly. Even football is beating teams like Alabama while we lose to McNeese. It is time for a new President and Dr. S has a full plate in front of him. But, the challenges are exciting with a magical pot at the end of the rainbow. It is truly time for this "sleeping giant" to awaken as we have been saying now for some 30 years. It is now or never for UL. I, for one, cannot wait for him to take over, announce new initiatives, and turn this whole thing around. I suspect Scott Farmer is waiting for Dr. S as well so that all of the new athletic initiatives can be announced under Dr. S' leadership, which is as it should be. _

I agree whole heartedly!

DaddyCajun

[DaddyCajun]

_ lame

she needs to worry about other things _

Marsha needs to worry about selling readers not papers!

DaddyCajun

[DestinCajun]

Staff or Wire should have written this article. Those dudes can bring it.

Z

Just imagine if they had collaborated on it!

Holy crap, it'd be the kind of gernalism even a guy like me could like.

[RaginFan2]

Staff or Wire should have written this article. Those dudes can bring it.

Z

Z, you crack me up!

[Zeebart21]

Z, you crack me up!

Jockamo I P A !!!!!

[shof]

_ Is there a link somewhere to the actual report including the 36 recommendations? I would prefer to read it myself rather than read what was written about it by someone else. _

This was archived on RaginPagin (30 Oct 2007). Hopefully its what you wanted. It didn't seem to pick up the hyperlinks; so you may have to go to the original post.
Shof

Entire UL Institutional Review




Intercollegiate Athletics portion

The University of Louisiana at Lafayette competes in the Sun Belt, a Division I conference, in eight men’s and eight women’s sports. Both its teams and its athletes have achieved conspicuous success over the years, especially in baseball, softball and football. Several dozen National Football League players have claimed UL as their alma mater.

At the same time, Louisiana Là athletes increasingly have performed well in their respective academic programs and their graduation rate exceeds that of the entire student body by about 27 twenty percent (according to the NCAA). In 2006, Louisiana Là student athletes had a 61 percent graduation rate. Further, in a recent year, Louisiana Là’s athletes earned the highest grade point average among Louisiana’s state universities. Praise is due those in charge of intercollegiate athletics and President Authement who have made this a priority. We encourage the next President to continue this leadership role and, indeed, determine how to transfer some of that success to the non-athlete portion of the student body.

While there are several challenges associated with UL’s intercollegiate athletic programs, the primary challenge is financial. ULL competes in the NCAA’s highest division, the Bowl Division (until recently, I-A), but spends far less money on intercollegiate athletics, and even on football, than the great majority of I-A members and less than many of the institutions in the lower Championship Division, which until recently was known as I-AA. Further, Louisiana Là and most institutions in the Sun Belt Conference contribute a significant proportion of their intercollegiate athletic revenues via direct and indirect institutional support.

We understand that the Board of Regents has made it possible for Louisiana’s public universities to increase the proportion of their budgets that can be spent on intercollegiate athletics. Many regard this as a questionable decision: “Spending more money isn’t going to change the situation at these schools very much unless they really spend lots more money, but it will take more money away from academic programs,” lamented a university president who would prefer a different approach.

Further, “the Sun Belt football teams often act as punching bags for SEC teams in order to take home a large financial guarantee.” More than one athletic director noted to us that Division I-AA teams often can obtain similar financial guarantees and that Division I-A status is not a prerequisite to such scheduling.

At a typical Division I-A (Bowl Division) institution, football ticket sales are a significant source of revenue. ULL’s total football revenue in 2004, from all sources, including gifts, was $1.286 million. However, in 2006, Louisiana Là averaged only 14,516 attendees per game, 116th among 119 Division I-A football teams. Fully 13 I-AA teams registered higher average 28 attendance. Troy State led Sun Belt Conference institutions with a 20,810 average attendance,
ranking it 87th.

The upshot is that it is quite difficult for UL and similarly situated institutions to support football programs at the Division I-A level. (It is apparent that UL and similar institutions can compete very capably in other sports.) A senior administrator expressed the dilemma this way: “The amount of money available for athletics probably needs to double or even triple for it to be a successful program.” We believe this proviso applies in particular to football.

An example may be instructive. Let’s compare UL to the University of Montana and McNeese State University, two successful I-AA level programs.


ULL U Montana McNeese

Football Revenue 2004 $1.286 m. $5.95 m. $1.687 m.
Football Expenditures 2004 $2.748 m. $4.18 m. $1.598 m.
Football Attendance 2006 14516 22600.000 10882
Total Athletic Revenue 2004 $7.62 m. $15.34 m. $4.987 m.
Total Athletic Expenditures 2004 $8.157 m. $12.69 m. $4.775 m.
Gain or Loss -.537 m. +2.65 m. +.212 m
Institutional Support 2004 $3.23 m. (42%) $3.79 m. (25%) $2.35 m. (47%)


Source: NCAA
We do not propose that UL eliminate intercollegiate athletics because we believe they have had a beneficial, unifying influence on the campus over the years and in addition have been a great source of institutional and regional pride. ULL needs intercollegiate athletics and demonstrably it can be very competitive in many sports. Therefore, (19) we recommend that the next President reexamine UL’s intercollegiate athletics programs and ask pointed 29 questions about their long-term revenue sources and expenditures, Louisiana Là’s conference affiliation, and especially the institution’s NCAA competitive level in football.



Quote:

Among the questions UL’s next president should consider is whether or not the university can continue to support a Division 1-A football program, according to an institutional review of the university.

The report released Monday also says the university should seek to change its culture of micromanagement, increase its tuition to the regional average and find money for nearly $130 million in deferred maintenance.

But the university’s situation is far from bleak, according to the review led by James Fisher, the consultant hired by the system to come up with recommendations for UL’s next president.

“The University of Louisiana () provides a sterling example of how one can achieve much with comparatively little,” Fisher writes in the opening line of the review.



The rest of the story