Is UL Athletics Broke?

[BabbForHeisman]

So, where is the $3.77m on football support staff?

Looking for that money tree.

SHOW ME THE MONEY

Can you maybe clarify what boogey man you are looking for? I’m genuinely confused.

[ExecutiveCajun]

I know you get it. Why aren't you in the middle of spear heading a breakaway from university control? If you are who I think you are, I will tell you right now, there is no better person for that job than you. I would trust you. I would support you. And if you can gain my trust & support & you don't even have the job. Just imagine what you could do for the university athletic program if you did have that job. You are the man to lead UL athletics into the rest of this half of this century. Now stand up & be the man. Be that guy.

they dont want people that will stand up and lead. they want people that wont ruffle feathers. people that will stay quiet and be happy with incremental growth over decades. they dont want athletics to overshadow anything academic related. they want yes men and women. which is why they employ yes men and women

[CajunVic]

Can you maybe clarify what boogey man you are looking for? I’m genuinely confused.

What is the number spent on football support staff last year and what is the number currently being spent on football support staff this year?

We have seen here numbers all the way from $2m to $3.77m and several in between.


When Napier was hired, it was a big thing that we were going to commit a pool of $2m for football support staff.

Since Napier’s hire, there really have been no reports of any increased funding which would support numbers over $2m. RCAF has not increased appreciably and may have decreased. Attendance has not increased appreciably or may have decreased. It has been indicated that Covid has costs us. There are rumors of a substantial decrease in the total budget which trickles down to athletics. All of these indicate a reduction in money available while a movement from $2m to $3.77m showed a substantial increase in spending.

So, with all that on the table, where is the reconciliation?

Where is the money tree?

SHOW ME THE MONEY

[BabbForHeisman]

What is the number spent on football support staff last year and what is the number currently being spent on football support staff this year?

We have seen here numbers all the way from $2m to $3.77m and several in between.


When Napier was hired, it was a big thing that we were going to commit a pool of $2m for football support staff.

Since Napier’s hire, there really have been no reports of any increased funding which would support numbers over $2m. RCAF has not increased appreciably and may have decreased. Attendance has not increased appreciably or may have decreased. It has been indicated that Covid has costs us. There are rumors of a substantial decrease in the total budget which trickles down to athletics. All of these indicate a reduction in money available while a movement from $2m to $3.77m showed a substantial increase in spending.

So, with all that on the table, where is the reconciliation?

Where is the money tree?

SHOW ME THE MONEY

Ok, so let me recap:

Based on the data provided by LouisianaB, we clearly spent $3.5-ish mln on football salaries in each of Napier's last two years. So that's Napier + $2-2.5 in other staff. That's clear.

Your concern is two-fold:
1) Verifying that the total budget for assistants remained the same for this year under Des, like Maggard said it would.
2) Figuring out where the money came from for all of those years (donations, decreases to other areas, etc)

If that's your concern, its been very muddled by just yelling the same thing over and over.

[LouisianaB]

Also, Hocke was getting paid $400k as the S&C coach. This had to have done out of general athletic accounts with only a small portion from football. Considering he was the “associate Head coach”, more of the $400k probably should be allocated to football. So that would bring it up to around $3.7

[CajunVic]

Looking at the information which has been posted on this site relative the issues of amounts expended on football support staff, it would take an auditor a week to come up with what we have and what we have missing in order to make a accurate evaluation.

Some numbers reflect budget amounts, some numbers reflect what has been actually paid without reference to how long the person paid has actually worked or whether that amount is before or after having received a raise with part of it based upon a before number and part an after number, some numbers reflect an annual expense without reference to whether that is a fiscal year or calendar year, some numbers have all of football in them and others do not.

Then there is your post which attempts to compare apples to oranges, without respect to time periods then round offs in your favor than states it is clear.

[Bandwagon King]

they dont want people that will stand up and lead. they want people that wont ruffle feathers. people that will stay quiet and be happy with incremental growth over decades. they dont want athletics to overshadow anything academic related. they want yes men and women. which is why they employ yes men and women

Unfortunately it is overwhelmingly apparent that you are spot on in your observation. I know you are a new poster, but it is also apparent you have been around this situation for a while as have I & many others much longer than myself. And these people love this school. They want so much for this school to be all it can be for the Acadiana community & because of the Acadiana community. And while I have to agree with your statement. I also must point out why that statement is so negatively counter intuitive to any growth, or potentiality of growth of the university & subsequently the Acadiana area as a whole.

The past three years have been a massive window of opportunity for this athletic program to lead the way for the academic institution to achieve & receive accreditations & accolades far beyond anything it has ever accomplished before. But did they take advantage of that window of opportunity? I hear posters here & there talk about tier one status. But what does tier one status mean if you aren't able to flex your impactive muscle to continue to soar & grow not only in numbers, but also in the accomplishments of the people who are leaving your institution to have a major impact on American business, research, environment, politics & entertainment among other things?

This football program had finally achieved the magic after years & years of failing, it had finally succeeded. But did those in power take advantage of that by rolling the dice & doubling down on their efforts to become a powerhouse university to lead this state out of the dark ages & into a new millennia of light & competitiveness beyond our dependence on the offshore oil industry which is dying a tragic slow painful death before everyone's eyes for the past decade? That industry is almost completely gone forever. And it will never return so forget about it. The point isn't even debatable.

So it is the responsibility of this academic institution to help lead this state out of dependence on such pipe dreams & into a new bright competitive future with the rest of America & the world. But just like they haven't answered the call & have hidden under their collective desks with regards to this challenge, so have they cowered at the opportunity to push forward with a new bold strategy of reaching out to those who are maybe not in the family to accept & welcome them into the family to grow the family instead of making it sick & weak from the incest of fear. This athletic program may only be a "porch", but the symptom of the continual cancer which metastasizes itself throughout the whole of it's being is a painfully obvious reminder that this university continually fails in its mission over & over again to LEAD & not just be an institution of less than mediocre achievement. It would be one thing if they had no potential. But I know better & so do many many of you as well.

[BabbForHeisman]

Looking at the information which has been posted on this site relative the issues of amounts expended on football support staff, it would take an auditor a week to come up with what we have and what we have missing in order to make a accurate evaluation.

Some numbers reflect budget amounts, some numbers reflect what has been actually paid without reference to how long the person paid has actually worked or whether that amount is before or after having received a raise with part of it based upon a before number and part an after number, some numbers reflect an annual expense without reference to whether that is a fiscal year or calendar year, some numbers have all of football in them and others do not.

Then there is your post which attempts to compare apples to oranges, without respect to time periods then round offs in your favor than states it is clear.

I'm legitimately still confused about your angle here. We have the data, posted above, that shows how much was spent on football related salaries, in each fiscal year. So regardless of who worked for what duration, got raises, etc...the number is still the same.

What apples and oranges are we comparing here? Please be specific, rather than vague.

[LouisianaB]

Data shows amounts spent in the FY.

[CajunVic]

Question, these seem a bit off. No position coach is making under 6 figures. Burris was making 6 figures when he left Tech and received a salary increase to join the staff. Where did these come from?

LB and B4H, what about this?

[BabbForHeisman]

LB and B4H, what about this?

Burris joined in late Feb 2021. Made $41K in FY21, which is only 3.5 months.

41K/(3.5/12) = $140K annual salary (estimate, not "belief")

So what am I missing here?

[LouisianaB]

Burris joined in late Feb 2021. Made $41K in FY21, which is only 3.5 months.

41K/(3.5/12) = $140K annual salary (estimate, not "belief")

So what am I missing here?

Salary $150k
Term commenced March 19, 2021