ISU vs. Iowa dominance (for Clones21)

[iahawkhunter]

My GUESS is that Iowa has a more athletic teams to pay for than ISU does. This is just my guess. And surely it doesn't account for all the money, but it's got to be part of it. Baseball alone has to eat up a good chunk of that money.

Good thought there. More teams (if true) would definitely require more money.

Probably. But why should they be different?

I think what you're saying is maybe Iowa stays in a nicer hotel, or eats a nicer meal just because they can. Because they have the money too?

I don't know if that's true or not, but that speaks to my point about how sometimes more money isn't always a great thing. Just more ways to waste it.

Easier to be disciplined when you're living paycheck to paycheck than when you have a seemingly endless flow.

I was thinking along the lines of nicer hotel/food (not sure what NCAA regs would exist for this, though), but this could also include opting to fly instead of drive. Some of these would be dictated by schedule and competition destinations, but some could be at the discretion of the athletic department.

And I agree that money doesn't always solve problems. I'm not trying to dispute that. I just wanted to point out in your earlier post that there were likely more avenues than facilities to account for the budget differences.

 

[Knownothing]

This thread is why I am sick of the baseball talk. It just eats up money that could he going to football wbb and mbb. It does nothing for iowa state because its almost impossible to compete every year with southern schools who play year round. The only isu baseball game o ever went to consisted of me ane my brother and about 8 parents of players. So I never understood the... bring baseball back crowd. Nobody goes and it costs a lot.

 

[hawkeyeguy85]

Good thought there. More teams (if true) would definitely require more money.





I was thinking along the lines of nicer hotel/food (not sure what NCAA regs would exist for this, though), but this could also include opting to fly instead of drive. Some of these would be dictated by schedule and competition destinations, but some could be at the discretion of the athletic department.

And I agree that money doesn't always solve problems. I'm not trying to dispute that. I just wanted to point out in your earlier post that there were likely more avenues than facilities to account for the budget differences.

Agree.

Which is why I don't think it's entirely fair to say UI AD budget - ISU AD budget = how much better Iowa should be, since they aren't funding the same stuff.

At the same time, the extra sports are only about an extra $10mil (according to Google), so it is fair to say ISU is getting a greater bang for the buck.

But I think some people think that if you just add $30 million to the ISU AD budget, it will result in $30 million more worth of wins (whatever that is).

This is where waste, mismanagement and convenience costs start to creep in. It's easier to keep things under control when you're kind of hamstrung by tight budgets by Pollard. But once you have a bunch of extra lying around, maybe that longest bus trip each year, you're flying now...etc and some of that extra money slips its way into things that don't necessarily advance the program.

 

[SplitIdentity]

Never really thought of the more sports aspect. In that case, $30 million spread out over 6 more teams equates to roughly $5 million per team. Not to mention the recent Carver renovation, the new basketball facility, the new football facility being created, and so on.

 

[kingcy]

It does. We need to bowl it in and put in a new press box. That is probably going to be a good 80 million. I think when we get to that point we will be comparable. You could argue one better than the other because one has more seats or the other has a bigger score board, but in the sense of being a legit BCS stadium they will be equals.

It also needs more suites, more consesions, more restrooms, better entrances/exits if you are going to expand it by a compete south endzone bowl in.

 

[hawkeyeguy85]

Never really thought of the more sports aspect. In that case, $30 million spread out over 6 more teams equates to roughly $5 million per team. Not to mention the recent Carver renovation, the new basketball facility, the new football facility being created, and so on.

Except it isn't $5 million per team, for the extra six.

Excluding Football, Basketball and Wrestling, Iowa spent $3.9 million TOTAL, on the rest of the men's sports, and $7.5 million totals on women's sports outside of BB and VB.

So you have to spread somewhere south of $10 million out over the extra 6 teams. They don't break it down for the smaller sports, so you can't get an exact number.

See page 11.

 

[Bigman38]

Agree.

Which is why I don't think it's entirely fair to say UI AD budget - ISU AD budget = how much better Iowa should be, since they aren't funding the same stuff.

At the same time, the extra sports are only about an extra $10mil (according to Google), so it is fair to say ISU is getting a greater bang for the buck.

But I think some people think that if you just add $30 million to the ISU AD budget, it will result in $30 million more worth of wins (whatever that is).

This is where waste, mismanagement and convenience costs start to creep in. It's easier to keep things under control when you're kind of hamstrung by tight budgets by Pollard. But once you have a bunch of extra lying around, maybe that longest bus trip each year, you're flying now...etc and some of that extra money slips its way into things that don't necessarily advance the program.

I agree that the extra sports play a big part in it, but it is a bad assumption that if ISU's budget went up that Pollard would all of a sudden do a much worse job managing it. There is wasted money in any budget, but giving Pollard another 30 mil isn't the same as giving a homeless guy a million dollars. If ISU's budget went up by 30 mil Pollard would get just as much out of the extra 30 that he has the rest of the budget.

 

[hawkeyeguy85]

I agree that the extra sports play a big part in it, but it is a bad assumption that if ISU's budget went up that Pollard would all of a sudden do a much worse job managing it. There is wasted money in any budget, but giving Pollard another 30 mil isn't the same as giving a homeless guy a million dollars. If ISU's budget went up by 30 mil Pollard would get just as much out of the extra 30 that he has the rest of the budget.

Maybe. And maybe not too.

I guarantee there are things that the ISU AD doesn't do simply because they can't afford it that they would if they had the money. And not all of those would necessarily "advance" the program.

Example, maybe they replace the longest bus trip with a flight. Easier on the (student) athletes. But probably doesn't = any more wins.

Higher salaries. Does CPR win more if he's making $2.5 million than whatever he makes now? No. Do the assistants coach better with higher salaries? No.

Now you can argue that helps keep coaches and attract higher profile coaches. But you're still going to end up paying more to people you have which doesn't win you anymore games.

 

[iahawkhunter]

I agree that the extra sports play a big part in it, but it is a bad assumption that if ISU's budget went up that Pollard would all of a sudden do a much worse job managing it. There is wasted money in any budget, but giving Pollard another 30 mil isn't the same as giving a homeless guy a million dollars. If ISU's budget went up by 30 mil Pollard would get just as much out of the extra 30 that he has the rest of the budget.

I don't think hawkeyeguy85 was suggesting that such creep would happen immediately. I took his argument to mean that if ISU had an extra $30M annually it would be easier for those costs to creep in and that over time some of those costs would find their way into our budget rather than their getting included as soon as we got the extra money.

 

[hawkeyeguy85]

I agree that the extra sports play a big part in it, but it is a bad assumption that if ISU's budget went up that Pollard would all of a sudden do a much worse job managing it. There is wasted money in any budget, but giving Pollard another 30 mil isn't the same as giving a homeless guy a million dollars. If ISU's budget went up by 30 mil Pollard would get just as much out of the extra 30 that he has the rest of the budget.

Look, my point isn't that extra money would just be squandered by the ISU AD. It wouldn't.

But it also isn't going to be pure increased results.

Everybody here made the same argument about Longhorn Network. Texas has SO MUCH money an extra $20 million doesn't make any difference to them.

The same principle (albeit muted) applies here. ISU is still on that curve. Yes extra money would show up in a much more spectacular way here, but some of that increase is still going to bleed into other things (that may very well be sound decisions) but won't necessarily show up in the W-L column, just make ISU AD a better place to be/work.

That probably has down the road benefits, but it isn't like every $1 million you add gets 2 wins to spread through the AD.

 

[hawkeyeguy85]

I don't think hawkeyeguy85 was suggesting that such creep would happen immediately. I took his argument to mean that if ISU had an extra $30M annually it would be easier for those costs to creep in and that over time some of those costs would find their way into our budget rather than their getting included as soon as we got the extra money.

Right. And not all of them would be bad decisions. Some would actually probably have some long-term return on investment.

But especially once you bring everything up-to-date, well then you're giving these guys a raise and throwing a little extra into this pot and you end up with more expenses almost simply because you have more revenue.

I guarantee you if you asked Pollard there's a whole list of things he has that he would quit making teams do if he had the money to allow them to quit sacrificing in those ways.

 

[Tedcyclone]

You're right. 6 more sports. 4 men's and 2 women's.

Men's gymnastics, swimming/diving, baseball and tennis.
Women's field hockey and rowing.

Would be interesting to see how much that eats up.

if that explains 27-30 million difference a year, then the athletic dept in iowa city is dumb. Dump everyone of those sports. Unless the university gets money for having them some way? Foreign students or something ? i have no idea.

Rowing, what is this Yale?

 

[Bigman38]

Look, my point isn't that extra money would just be squandered by the ISU AD. It wouldn't.

But it also isn't going to be pure increased results.

Everybody here made the same argument about Longhorn Network. Texas has SO MUCH money an extra $20 million doesn't make any difference to them.

The same principle (albeit muted) applies here. ISU is still on that curve. Yes extra money would show up in a much more spectacular way here, but some of that increase is still going to bleed into other things (that may very well be sound decisions) but won't necessarily show up in the W-L column, just make ISU AD a better place to be/work.

That probably has down the road benefits, but it isn't like every $1 million you add gets 2 wins to spread through the AD.

I agree that you can't say 5 mill to the football budget would mean 1 more win a season. It's not that easy, you have to use the money to buy better facilities and get better coaches and down the road it could turn into more wins.

My point is assuming more money in the budget means it will be wasted on raises and other frivolous things is untrue. If it was true he would be making those decisions right now, adding money wouldn't change that.

Right now across the board ISU is doing more with less but we fall short in the most important category, football. As an ISU fan I hope that is changing right now but we'll see.

 

[Bigman38]

I don't think hawkeyeguy85 was suggesting that such creep would happen immediately. I took his argument to mean that if ISU had an extra $30M annually it would be easier for those costs to creep in and that over time some of those costs would find their way into our budget rather than their getting included as soon as we got the extra money.

Again, I'm saying that 30 mil wouldn't bring those problems. Your suggesting that there is a number that the budget would cross where JP would start mismanaging a larger percentage of the budget. My point is if he is "wasting" 5% of the budget now, that percentage won't change with 30 mil added.

 

[jaretac]

Directors cup standings

2011: Iowa 43, ISU 60
2010: ISU 34, Iowa 55
2009: Iowa 45, ISU 58
2008: Iowa 50, ISU 58
2007: Iowa 68, ISU 73
2006: Iowa 53, ISU 97
2005: Iowa 39, ISU 60
2004: Iowa 48, ISU 123
2003: Iowa 42, ISU 107
2002: Iowa 48, ISU 58

Iowa average finish: 49.1
ISU average finish: 58.9

Note that the more sports a school has the easier it is to get points in the directors cup.

 

[JUKEBOX]

Here's some comparison between facilities. When Jack Trice gets bowled in, it could nudge out Kinnick IMO. Hilton absolutely destroys Carver. Can anybody compare any other facilities?

 

[JUKEBOX]

ISU Basketball Facility:

Iowa:
? Can't find one. Maybe they use Carver?

 

[Cydkar]

If this is a message to clones21, why was it not sent privately?

No doubt. It should have read "Open letter to Clones21"

 

[Cydkar]

This thread is why I am sick of the baseball talk. It just eats up money that could he going to football wbb and mbb. It does nothing for iowa state because its almost impossible to compete every year with southern schools who play year round. The only isu baseball game o ever went to consisted of me ane my brother and about 8 parents of players. So I never understood the... bring baseball back crowd. Nobody goes and it costs a lot.

Baseball will NEVER come back so I agree, any posts regarding that are useless.

 

[Cydkar]

ISU Basketball Facility:

Iowa:
? Can't find one. Maybe they use Carver?

Fail