Start with the basics:

Set as an objective the goal to provide a competitive level of funding for MBB

or

NOT.

How we accomplish the objective is moot until the objective is set. Today we are living a lie in pretending we want to field a competitive CAA MBB program with lower-tier funding. Until we get clarity on the objective, it’s all meaningless.

And to follow up on that point, if we don't make that decision, we will get the same results over and over again, but in a lesser conference.

On another related topic, don't be so sure this isn't going on in other programs like Women's Soccer. A close friend is involved in Women's Soccer, and the same bait and switch with the money from donors earmarked for that sport is going on.

I promise that Huge knows all about it. I'm waiting to see when she fixes it or at least makes if fair.

(10-26-2017 10:21 AM)Rocco Wrote:  

(10-26-2017 10:00 AM)Mrs. Got Ribe Wrote:  [quote='BigTribe3' pid='14713622' dateline='1509014109']
We need to find some more money.

Bake sales? Bank robbery? Someone here wins the lottery? Cut other programs and channel the $1m into hoops?

Valid point

Am certain the coaching staff would welcome the $1M/yr infusion. Am less certain how much it would move the overall success needle in the face of structural impediments.

The proclivity at the College is to view challenges/shortcomings as cyclical. The mindset is that a combination of continuing the present course, time and patience will result in better outcomes. This year’s underclassmen will become next year’s upperclassmen. The second coming of Marcus Thornton will show up in next year’s recruiting class. The next set of coaching hires will be beyond brilliant. The gap between large donations will shrink. In down years for revenue sports, the success of the cross country and swimming teams reflect the wisdom of this mindset. The revenue sports will surely prosper in the future.

The reality is that the College’s adherence to the status quo leaves in place structural challenges that are greater impediments to the “championship experience” goal than the cyclical challenges. Enrollment and associated activity fees will only grow modestly and perhaps at a slower rate than is the case for the competition. Entrance requirements, correctly, will remain stringent. The College will continue to support an extensive number of sports.

Perhaps more important, the incentives that drive NCAA governance and behavior leave the College at a persistent disadvantage. There is an inherent conflict between the College’s commitment to amateurism and academic integrity and the commitment of the NCAA President to being paid $1.9M/yr.

Sep/Oct headlines make it abundantly clear that ethical behavior can’t compete with the benjamins. It took an FBI investigation into corruption to prod the NCAA into forming a commission to address commonly understood behavior. More infuriating is that the entire commission has ties to the Power 5/Big East. The people chosen to fix a problem are the same ones who have been allowed to gerrymander non-conference schedules such that Power 5 schools virtually never play non-conference away games thereby skewing NCAA tournament participation toward the Power 5.

The non-Power 5 ADs don’t give much indication of being particularly vocal about competition issues. One would love to see the letter signed by these ADs advocating that non-conference away games at places like Kaplan be part of tournament selection criteria. Sometimes it’s hard not to suspect they might be afraid to make waves for fear of gooning their own potential future higher paying Power 5 jobs. If so, this would fall under the heading of structural issues.

The UNC decision speaks for itself. For the NCAA as presently led, the student in student athlete is decidedly an advisory construct.

Numerous NCAA member institutions have clearly calculated that the rewards of unsanctioned unethical behavior outweigh the risks, and one can only conclude that the financial contributions these institutions make to the NCAA’s balance sheet and payroll are sufficient for the NCAA leadership to turn a blind eye.

W&M athletes are competing as amateurs in a structure that allows many competitors to play by another set of rules. The question to be posed at this point is whether the crumbs that fall off the Power 5 table are so important that a review of the desirability of the existing structure can’t be risked.

Maintaining the present cyclical mindset at the College may result in years when the football team makes the FCS playoffs, and the basketball team sneaks into the NIT. It will also result in more than a few years when fans will have to resort to bragging about the field hockey team.

Trailing 46 - 0 at homecoming might be indicative of cyclical challenges. This year’s sophomores will be next year’s juniors (although when the competition reloads with FBS transfers any improvement is apt to be muted). At some point the fact that the basketball team has never been to the NCAA tournament becomes harder to characterize as a cyclical challenge.

(10-29-2017 09:28 AM)Florida tribe fan Wrote:  Am certain the coaching staff would welcome the $1M/yr infusion. Am less certain how much it would move the overall success needle in the face of structural impediments.

The proclivity at the College is to view challenges/shortcomings as cyclical. The mindset is that a combination of continuing the present course, time and patience will result in better outcomes. This year’s underclassmen will become next year’s upperclassmen. The second coming of Marcus Thornton will show up in next year’s recruiting class. The next set of coaching hires will be beyond brilliant. The gap between large donations will shrink. In down years for revenue sports, the success of the cross country and swimming teams reflect the wisdom of this mindset. The revenue sports will surely prosper in the future.

The reality is that the College’s adherence to the status quo leaves in place structural challenges that are greater impediments to the “championship experience” goal than the cyclical challenges. Enrollment and associated activity fees will only grow modestly and perhaps at a slower rate than is the case for the competition. Entrance requirements, correctly, will remain stringent. The College will continue to support an extensive number of sports.

Perhaps more important, the incentives that drive NCAA governance and behavior leave the College at a persistent disadvantage. There is an inherent conflict between the College’s commitment to amateurism and academic integrity and the commitment of the NCAA President to being paid $1.9M/yr.

Sep/Oct headlines make it abundantly clear that ethical behavior can’t compete with the benjamins. It took an FBI investigation into corruption to prod the NCAA into forming a commission to address commonly understood behavior. More infuriating is that the entire commission has ties to the Power 5/Big East. The people chosen to fix a problem are the same ones who have been allowed to gerrymander non-conference schedules such that Power 5 schools virtually never play non-conference away games thereby skewing NCAA tournament participation toward the Power 5.

The non-Power 5 ADs don’t give much indication of being particularly vocal about competition issues. One would love to see the letter signed by these ADs advocating that non-conference away games at places like Kaplan be part of tournament selection criteria. Sometimes it’s hard not to suspect they might be afraid to make waves for fear of gooning their own potential future higher paying Power 5 jobs. If so, this would fall under the heading of structural issues.

The UNC decision speaks for itself. For the NCAA as presently led, the student in student athlete is decidedly an advisory construct.

Numerous NCAA member institutions have clearly calculated that the rewards of unsanctioned unethical behavior outweigh the risks, and one can only conclude that the financial contributions these institutions make to the NCAA’s balance sheet and payroll are sufficient for the NCAA leadership to turn a blind eye.

W&M athletes are competing as amateurs in a structure that allows many competitors to play by another set of rules. The question to be posed at this point is whether the crumbs that fall off the Power 5 table are so important that a review of the desirability of the existing structure can’t be risked.

Maintaining the present cyclical mindset at the College may result in years when the football team makes the FCS playoffs, and the basketball team sneaks into the NIT. It will also result in more than a few years when fans will have to resort to bragging about the field hockey team.

Trailing 46 - 0 at homecoming might be indicative of cyclical challenges. This year’s sophomores will be next year’s juniors (although when the competition reloads with FBS transfers any improvement is apt to be muted). At some point the fact that the basketball team has never been to the NCAA tournament becomes harder to characterize as a cyclical challenge.

Did I read this right that we are trying to run the entire mbb on virtually the same amount as the NCAA President is paid, give or take a couple of shekels? That, along with the UNC charade, speaks volumes as to the issue here. I'm proud of our concept, but it needs adjustments within ethical bounds.

I have an acquaintance who was a varsity athlete at Ole Miss and transferred to W&M decades ago and was a varsity athlete here as well. His description of the contrast of his experience as athlete at each school is startlingly different. While I don't want to go to the P5 model, there are adjustments we can make to the system to enhance our competitive position without endangering our academic reputation or the education that our students, including athletes receive.

Great post (Florida tribe fan)! I will give you a +1 to your reputation if I figure out how to do it!

Welcome to the Board, FTF. You make some interesting points. As Leadbolt said, some things need to be changed to our process of running our sports program and, hopefully, Ms Huge will be up to that task.

My biggest desire for change is directed at the Fund-Raising arm of the Athletic Department. Bobby Dwyer and his staff do a solid job, with a very tough task, asking people for large sums of cash. Never easy to do.

What I would like to see changed, or at least tweaked, is the manner of the search for specific pockets of cash (say, for Coach's Salaries, etc.) Currently, Bobby, et al, target a rich alum and do the soft pitch to work up to the big donation (say, looking for another Walt Zable or a Jim and Jane Kaplan). This is a fairly slow process and you can only go to each well a certain number of times, before it becomes harder to retrieve the water.

What I would like to see added to this process is to form a type of "W&M Fund Me" situation. The one thing I have been MOST impressed with, over the past few years, is the extraordinary success of the "One Tribe, One Day" fund-raiser. It doesn't involve one or two Big Donors, but every Tribe Alum, giving what they can, large or small, to foster a greater future for our beloved school.

I would suggest refining this concept to form another ongoing funding system, to focus on Sports and Athletic Department needs. It would have to be used on a somewhat restricted basis, say Basketball Recruiting Budget, as opposed to a constant presence looking for a handout (loses that feel of being a special "quest"), However, as this Board has seen during the Jamaica Trip Funds Raiser, when the faithful are made aware that they can make something special happen, W&M alums are ready and willing to pitch in.

I think this could be effectively used to increase the revenue available to Basketball, as has been most often sited, to finally get both squads to the NCAA's and also used for other areas and sports as the need becomes apparent. It would take a concentrated effort by the Fund Raising Office, for each new project, but getting the word out that our "Fund Me" goal for the, let's say, next three months is to increase the Recruiting Budget for Basketball and making a dedicated page for that project, would make it very easy for those who believe in this cause to actually do something positive about it.

The big thing that would have to be established is that funds raised in this manner would have to ADD to the sport it is being raised for, not just to replace funds already earmarked for that sport (a favorite bait and switch of the Athletic Department, in the past).

If we pool the resources of the masses (like the One Tribe effort), then reaching the dollar amounts needed for some of the goals set forth in the For the Bold missive would certainly be more readily, and more quickly, attainable.

Okay, I'm off my Soapbox. Now, back to regular programming...

(10-29-2017 09:28 AM)Florida tribe fan Wrote:  At some point the fact that the basketball team has never been to the NCAA tournament becomes harder to characterize as a cyclical challenge.

FTF--Do you have our house bugged? Mr. Ribe was making this exact point to me last night. And, if I am not mistaken, I believe we have exchanged emails where you have said things that Mr. Ribe and I had also recently discussed.
Welcome to the board!

There are a lot of good points here: Tribeinexile, Rocco, Billymac.
1. We need to decide and STATE what our basketball goal is. Are we going to fund a competitive product?

2. If we are, we need to find more money. And as Rocco pointed out, there aren't a whole lot of options to do that as things stand now.

Which brings us to
3. Billymac's idea: Find a different way to fundraise (or at least supplement what we are doing now). With the summer school and foreign trip, Mr. Ribe and I found out that people will give when the goals are specific, identified, and stated--and we certainly didn't go after the heavy hitters. As a matter of fact, we were discouraged from going after them for the exact reasons Billymac gives--you can't go back to the well too many times. I think Coach Shaver has a wishlist. If so, let's (as an athletic department) move on that. I'd like to include Coach Swanson's ideas here, too.

I am optimistic that Ms. Huge will have some ways to accomplish these things. She has shared with me that she understands the impact a successful basketball team can have on the College as a whole.

(10-29-2017 02:23 PM)Mrs. Got Ribe Wrote:  I am optimistic that Ms. Huge will have some ways to accomplish these things. She has shared with me that she understands the impact a successful basketball team can have on the College as a whole.

Beyond the fund raising support, let's hope she can miraculously run against the current, college basketball landscape by pulling connections to improve the OOC home schedule.

Sent from my SM-N910V using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-29-2017 12:22 PM)billymac Wrote:  What I would like to see added to this process is to form a type of "W&M Fund Me" situation. The one thing I have been MOST impressed with, over the past few years, is the extraordinary success of the "One Tribe, One Day" fund-raiser. It doesn't involve one or two Big Donors, but every Tribe Alum, giving what they can, large or small, to foster a greater future for our beloved school.

I would suggest refining this concept to form another ongoing funding system, to focus on Sports and Athletic Department needs. It would have to be used on a somewhat restricted basis, say Basketball Recruiting Budget, as opposed to a constant presence looking for a handout (loses that feel of being a special "quest"), However, as this Board has seen during the Jamaica Trip Funds Raiser, when the faithful are made aware that they can make something special happen, W&M alums are ready and willing to pitch in.

Great idea! Why hasn't this been done before now? By the way, note that if it becomes too successful then it will become the de facto way to fund each program with the College withholding funds that it used to give (small as they were), similar to the way that the State stopped funneling as much into education because the lottery had started providing it. But don't get me wrong -- it sounds good and should be tried.

I think there is an untapped young alum giving base. I know lots of young alumni who'd give $100 (or whatever they could) to a specific goal. It may not seem like much but if you can get donors in while they're young, the size of their donations will increase year after year.

One of billymac's points that I haven't seen before is that women's basketball can be included in fundraising efforts to help boost a rising program and offset Title IX concerns. The women's team is certainly on the upswing kind of like the men's program was with the Britt/Rusthoven class.

It's been raised before.

This email came today. I guess this is close to what I was suggesting in my post, earlier. Would like to see it done by the Athletic Department, for their "wish list" projects. It would also have to be strongly promoted to get the desired return.

TRIBEFUNDING

An entrepreneurial spirit and commitment to service run deep at William & Mary. Tribefunding, our crowdfunding initiative, is an opportunity to help the community dream up big ideas, fund bold projects and make an impact at W&M and far beyond — just like you've done in the past.


Tribefunding allows William & Mary faculty, staff and students to engage with their passions, no matter the size of the undertaking. These passion projects allow every member of our community to make an immediate impact on ventures that they deeply care about.


The Tribefunding projects are live through December 15, 2017. Through these projects, you can help:

• Subsidize a service trip for students to build a house for a Nicaraguan family.
• Produce training modules to be used in e-learning initiatives.
• Support a student written and directed play on Filipino culture.
• Create 3D fish larval and fish models for education and outreach to benefit VIMS,
W&M and local K-12 schools.
• Provide funds to transform city spaces into futuristic and supernatural scenes
through photography in Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince.
• Fund international, policy-relevant student research through ITPIR's
Shark Tank competition.


Visit our crowdfunding platform hosted by GiveCampus to browse projects, join the community and support great ideas from the Tribe community.



It's not exactly what I would design, but the basics are there. Guess someone is listening.

(11-01-2017 10:39 AM)billymac Wrote:  This email came today. I guess this is close to what I was suggesting in my post, earlier. Would like to see it done by the Athletic Department, for their "wish list" projects. It would also have to be strongly promoted to get the desired return.

TRIBEFUNDING

An entrepreneurial spirit and commitment to service run deep at William & Mary. Tribefunding, our crowdfunding initiative, is an opportunity to help the community dream up big ideas, fund bold projects and make an impact at W&M and far beyond — just like you've done in the past.


Tribefunding allows William & Mary faculty, staff and students to engage with their passions, no matter the size of the undertaking. These passion projects allow every member of our community to make an immediate impact on ventures that they deeply care about.


The Tribefunding projects are live through December 15, 2017. Through these projects, you can help:

• Subsidize a service trip for students to build a house for a Nicaraguan family.
• Produce training modules to be used in e-learning initiatives.
• Support a student written and directed play on Filipino culture.
• Create 3D fish larval and fish models for education and outreach to benefit VIMS,
W&M and local K-12 schools.
• Provide funds to transform city spaces into futuristic and supernatural scenes
through photography in Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince.
• Fund international, policy-relevant student research through ITPIR's
Shark Tank competition.


Visit our crowdfunding platform hosted by GiveCampus to browse projects, join the community and support great ideas from the Tribe community.



It's not exactly what I would design, but the basics are there. Guess someone is listening.

The origin of this thread was that the Big Ten was going to a 20 game conference schedule. One can infer from the Big Ten commissioner’s accompanying remarks that there were two primary reasons for this change — money and money. The Big Ten wishes to generate more content for its television network, and it wishes to strengthen, theoretically, its strength of schedule by gaming NCAA tournament selection so Big Ten schools receive a larger share of tournament revenues.

The Big Ten is within its rights to do this. But there has never been a better time to throw the challenge flag (and wave another flag) regarding the notion that a conference can systematically reduce the risk it could lose games to mid-majors, particularly at away venues, and then claim superiority at tournament selection time.

As to the College, additional funding via crowd sourcing would be useful. And if athletic budgeting at the College has medical billing/chargemaster aspects such that it takes $1.3 million of basketball income to buy $1 million of basketball, some transparency may be in order to avoid alienating donors. Given the staggering sums of money in the hands of the Power 5, it’s hard to believe these steps alone will be transformational meaning that vision, leadership, and voice become critical.

We’re at a juncture where the academically minded mid-majors risk letting a perfectly good crisis go to waste as the corruption scandal offers a huge opportunity.

Quoting from the NCAA President’s remarks on Oct 30 —
“The American public is losing confidence in the governance of college athletics.”
NCAA polling shows “79 percent of people polled said big schools put money ahead of student athletes, 69 percent considered those universities more of a problem than a solution, and 51 percent said the NCAA is part of the problem.”
“We cannot go into the next basketball season without seeing fundamental change in the way college basketball is operating.”
“The public doesn’t have sufficient confidence in any of us. I’ll take that...on myself, too, in terms of our ability to solve these issues.”

The College should be in violent agreement with the above assessment, and offer to lead the counter-commission of representatives from institutions that are trusted. This would be the commission empowered to generate recommendations about the legitimacy of one half and drones, transfers, recruiting, shoes, scheduling, officiating, rules, and other issues that don’t come from the places that created the mess.

I google basketball scandal every day hoping that someone not named Krzyzewski is being quoted on the way ahead. Either the algorithms have failed me or it hasn’t happened. There will never be a better time for the College to make some noise when it could make a difference. Cue the towel man.

Yep. We agree.

Here's my analogy.

The P5 is Longshanks.

The G5 and everyone else are the Scottish nobles.

I want W&M to be William Wallace.

Unfortunately, to date, everyone associated with W&M acts like the Scottish nobles, happy with the scraps from Longshanks' table.

W&M needs "freedom" from a corrupt system, and W&M is in a unique position to effectuate change.

Just need the will.

(11-05-2017 06:26 PM)nj alum Wrote:  Yep. We agree.

Here's my analogy.

The P5 is Longshanks.

The G5 and everyone else are the Scottish nobles.

I want W&M to be William Wallace.

Unfortunately, to date, everyone associated with W&M acts like the Scottish nobles, happy with the scraps from Longshanks' table.

W&M needs "freedom" from a corrupt system, and W&M is in a unique position to effectuate change.

Just need the will.

I demand all message board posts be written with analogies to Mel Gibson movies from here on out.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

The problem, with the analogy at least, is that the P5 is more than happy for W&M and everyone else to have their freedom. They're not trying to keep Scotland in the fold; they're building walls to keep them out. The 20-game schedule is a brick. I'm surprised they haven't bumped it all the way up to a full 26-game schedule, to be honest.

W&M:

The NCAA, in response: