Are the two mutually exclusive?

Everything Wyoming Cowboy and Mountain West football!
Post Reply
ragtimejoe1
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 5118
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
Has liked: 20 times
Been liked: 116 times

I've seen a lot of posts about essentially abandoning football to feed more resources to basketball. I'm not necessarily debating the idea, but my question is: are our resources infinitely limited which makes football an eternal anchor to basketball? Are the budgetary requirements to field a great football team and a great basketball team too high great for us to achieve? Are there brackets of budget ranges which yield success in football? In other words, we are investing 7 million on football but a successful program requires 14 million. We can have the same amount of success with 5 million. Thus, we should reallocate 2 million to the bball program?

I don't know if I've articulated the question appropriately, but the bottom line is, can we have both a Gonzaga of the Rockies, and a T40 football program (with T15 or better on occasion) or are the two mutually exclusive at Wyoming?

Personally, I think we can have both and they will feed off of each other.
WYO1016 wrote: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:10 am I'm starting to think that Burman has been laying the pipe to ragtimejoe1's wife
Insults are the last resort of fools with a crumbling position.
User avatar
TheCup
Ranch Hand
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: Cheyenne, WY

In a perfect world, or in a P5 conference, I don't think they are mutually exclusive. In our world, I'm afraid it's pretty close.

Wyoming is unique. That's been long established. But it's worth looking at what that really means when it comes to the cold reality of dollars and cents.

Wyoming currently spends about $7.5 million/year on football. We spend about $4.5 million/year on basketball. How does that compare?

Gonzaga's annual basketball budget is about $9.4 million/year. They spend zero on football. San Diego State spends about $8.5 million on basketball and about $12 million on football. Colorado State spends about $6.5 million on basketball along with the $12 million on football.

What's this have to do with the price of tea in China? Here's what: Wyoming spends on football and basketball combined about what CSU and SDSU each spend just for football.

So let's say Burman, the president and the trustees all grew a pair of nuts overnight and said we're going all-in to win championships in BOTH football and basketball. And let's also say that they're going to do it by achieving parity of resources and not by relying on some tired poop about being "Cowboy Tough" or working "harder and smarter." What would the budget look like to get there?

I would say Wyoming needs to spend at least $12 million/year (same as CSU, SDSU and in Boise's neighborhood) to win championships in football. And if we want to build a real, perennial Sweet 16 or deeper threat in basketball we probably need to plus up the basketball budget to about $8 million (in SDSU and Gonzaga's neighborhood). That's a total of $20 million/year, or about $8 million MORE per year than we are currently spending. How do we get $8 million in operating funds?

People will say all the fans need to increase their contributions to the Cowboy Joe Club. Ok, great. The CJC has about 4,500 members and generates about $3.25 million in cash donations throughout the year. This obviously does not count the huge facility gifts from the McMurry's, Rochelle's, etc. This isn't perfect math, and I've worked it backward from publicly available information (no inside sources here) but I believe each CJC member currently donates, on average, about $722 a year.

So let's say EVERYONE in the CJC doubled their contribution overnight. This is meant to sound impossible to illustrate the problem because going this route is, actually, impossible. If every single member doubled overnight, CJC would generate an additional $3.25 million every year to throw at this effort. Or, basically, it would get us not even halfway to our goal.

What about season tickets? UW football sells about 7500 season tickets every year at about $200/seat (about $1.5 million/yr). Basketball sells about 4000 season tickets at about $230/seat (about $920,000/yr). I know these costs aren't exact. There are variables involved so don't kill me. But they're close enough to make the point. So if, overnight, UW doubled the cost of season tickets (or sold twice as many) we would raise revenues by about $1.4 million/year.

So if we all of a sudden doubled CJC donations AND doubled season ticket sales AND didn't lose a single season ticket holder or CJC member, we could raise revenue by about $4.6 million. Awesome! We're halfway there!

I'm going to stop now because I think the point has been made. You can see the real revenue picture below in the screen grab from the USA Today website. If you believe, like I do, that winning costs money and that competitive parity probably requires spending parity, then there are very few paths to find an additional $8 million/year. To piece it together UW would have to double CJC donations AND double season ticket sales AND double student fees AND find another $2 million/year from some other magical pot of gold.

Image

OR...

The only real, conceivable path to get there is to significantly increase the amount of state support to operational funds for athletics. This really shouldn't be that hard of a lift. Once the HAPC is complete, I believe the total amount of state funds directed to athletics facilities improvements in the past 15 years will be about $45 million. That's just facilities. If we can spend $45 million on bricks and mortar, couldn't we also spend that on, you know, actual winning?

The question is likely moot for the next few years due to the state's revenue picture, but the opportunity has been there. This state floats on an ocean of cash. Wyoming has the 33rd largest sovereign wealth fund IN THE WORLD.

Doubling season tickets and CJC donations and all that is a functional impossibility. The numbers just don't exist to support it. It is complete fantasy. But finding another $8 million in the state budget takes 16 votes in the Senate, 31 votes in the State House and 1 signature in the governor's office.

Significantly increased state support is the only way to make this happen. It's just a matter of whether the university's leaders have the backbone to pursue it, and if the elected leaders in the state have the will to support it.
Wyovanian
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Location: Wherever I'm At
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 16 times

TheCup wrote:In a perfect world, or in a P5 conference, I don't think they are mutually exclusive. In our world, I'm afraid it's pretty close.

Wyoming is unique. That's been long established. But it's worth looking at what that really means when it comes to the cold reality of dollars and cents.

Wyoming currently spends about $7.5 million/year on football. We spend about $4.5 million/year on basketball. How does that compare?

Gonzaga's annual basketball budget is about $9.4 million/year. They spend zero on football. San Diego State spends about $8.5 million on basketball and about $12 million on football. Colorado State spends about $6.5 million on basketball along with the $12 million on football.

What's this have to do with the price of tea in China? Here's what: Wyoming spends on football and basketball combined about what CSU and SDSU each spend just for football.

So let's say Burman, the president and the trustees all grew a pair of nuts overnight and said we're going all-in to win championships in BOTH football and basketball. And let's also say that they're going to do it by achieving parity of resources and not by relying on some tired poop about being "Cowboy Tough" or working "harder and smarter." What would the budget look like to get there?

I would say Wyoming needs to spend at least $12 million/year (same as CSU, SDSU and in Boise's neighborhood) to win championships in football. And if we want to build a real, perennial Sweet 16 or deeper threat in basketball we probably need to plus up the basketball budget to about $8 million (in SDSU and Gonzaga's neighborhood). That's a total of $20 million/year, or about $8 million MORE per year than we are currently spending. How do we get $8 million in operating funds?

People will say all the fans need to increase their contributions to the Cowboy Joe Club. Ok, great. The CJC has about 4,500 members and generates about $3.25 million in cash donations throughout the year. This obviously does not count the huge facility gifts from the McMurry's, Rochelle's, etc. This isn't perfect math, and I've worked it backward from publicly available information (no inside sources here) but I believe each CJC member currently donates, on average, about $722 a year.

So let's say EVERYONE in the CJC doubled their contribution overnight. This is meant to sound impossible to illustrate the problem because going this route is, actually, impossible. If every single member doubled overnight, CJC would generate an additional $3.25 million every year to throw at this effort. Or, basically, it would get us not even halfway to our goal.

What about season tickets? UW football sells about 7500 season tickets every year at about $200/seat (about $1.5 million/yr). Basketball sells about 4000 season tickets at about $230/seat (about $920,000/yr). I know these costs aren't exact. There are variables involved so don't kill me. But they're close enough to make the point. So if, overnight, UW doubled the cost of season tickets (or sold twice as many) we would raise revenues by about $1.4 million/year.

So if we all of a sudden doubled CJC donations AND doubled season ticket sales AND didn't lose a single season ticket holder or CJC member, we could raise revenue by about $4.6 million. Awesome! We're halfway there!

I'm going to stop now because I think the point has been made. You can see the real revenue picture below in the screen grab from the USA Today website. If you believe, like I do, that winning costs money and that competitive parity probably requires spending parity, then there are very few paths to find an additional $8 million/year. To piece it together UW would have to double CJC donations AND double season ticket sales AND double student fees AND find another $2 million/year from some other magical pot of gold.

Image

OR...

The only real, conceivable path to get there is to significantly increase the amount of state support to operational funds for athletics. This really shouldn't be that hard of a lift. Once the HAPC is complete, I believe the total amount of state funds directed to athletics facilities improvements in the past 15 years will be about $45 million. That's just facilities. If we can spend $45 million on bricks and mortar, couldn't we also spend that on, you know, actual winning?

The question is likely moot for the next few years due to the state's revenue picture, but the opportunity has been there. This state floats on an ocean of cash. Wyoming has the 33rd largest sovereign wealth fund IN THE WORLD.

Doubling season tickets and CJC donations and all that is a functional impossibility. The numbers just don't exist to support it. It is complete fantasy. But finding another $8 million in the state budget takes 16 votes in the Senate, 31 votes in the State House and 1 signature in the governor's office.

Significantly increased state support is the only way to make this happen. It's just a matter of whether the university's leaders have the backbone to pursue it, and if the elected leaders in the state have the will to support it.
That's a pretty good, thorough answer, but there's a few possibilities left out of the argument- one is revenue enhancement (beer sales being one example). The other, very big one, would be HNW donor gift-based. A UW Athletics Endowment that generates funds on interest and investment. If we had even $25M to start, it could be expected to generate around $2.5M per annum with the near-term goal, through early reinvestment and contribution to get to $100M, generating about $10M per annum.

In short, there's more than one way to skin this mule.
"WE are the music makers and WE are the dreamers of the dreams." -Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
User avatar
TheCup
Ranch Hand
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: Cheyenne, WY

Wyovanian wrote: That's a pretty good, thorough answer, but there's a few possibilities left out of the argument- one is revenue enhancement (beer sales being one example). The other, very big one, would be HNW donor gift-based. A UW Athletics Endowment that generates funds on interest and investment. If we had even $25M to start, it could be expected to generate around $2.5M per annum with the near-term goal, through early reinvestment and contribution to get to $100M, generating about $10M per annum.

In short, there's more than one way to skin this mule.
I 100% agree. I mostly intended to show the FASTEST and most realistic way to get there, mostly because I'm feeling old. Not the ONLY way.

As I understand it, the best performing university endowments in the country grow at just under 10% annually. I believe most are around 3% or 4%. I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I think it's a great idea. If I was Burman I'd get on it tomorrow.

But even a $25M endowment that spins off 10% / year in revenue (which I think is outrageously optimistic) would add about $1.25 million to the pie if you devoted half the income to athletics and re-invested the other half. That, plus 2x season tickets, plus 2x CJC money, plus 2x student fees and we're just about there. And, at that rate, we'd be to a $100M endowment in maybe 30-50 years depending on the market.

I might not have that long. I eat poop of gluten.
User avatar
LanderPoke
WyoNation Lifer
Posts: 11160
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:47 pm
Location: Laramie
Has liked: 586 times
Been liked: 236 times

A permanent fund for athletics is a great idea. Why hasn't this been done already?
User avatar
PokeOLoco
A Real Cowboy
Posts: 1251
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:40 pm
Location: Denver

<thinks about who has been in charge for 9 years, stops wondering>
“Being around Colorado State, I saw that football wasn’t really a big sport there," Parker said Sunday night.
User avatar
McPeachy
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 7914
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 2:04 pm
Has liked: 291 times
Been liked: 115 times

LanderPoke wrote:A permanent fund for athletics is a great idea. Why hasn't this been done already?
Well...like I bitch about on a weekly basis...

It is much easier to just throw out some TBD's and TBA's. Putting together a fund would take some hard work and long hours. Neither of which...eh...nevermind.

:whistle:
Dear Karma,

I have a list of people you missed...
User avatar
laxwyo
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 9464
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:27 am
Location: Rock Springs, WY
Has liked: 128 times
Been liked: 134 times

The 500k from Saturday's game on ESPN would be good start
W-Y, Until I Die!
User avatar
calpoke25
A Real Cowboy
Posts: 1816
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: SoCal

It wouldn't even be that hard to start. Next year when you mail CJC renewals you have the option to contribute to the brand new Wyoming Athletics investment fund. There would need to be terms and conditions outlining that the returns MUST be spent on an annual basis, with a certain percentage to be reinvested, so that the AD couldn't turn it into some "rainy day fund" like the state and never spend it.

I think it's a great idea and along with the other points outlined above I think a combination of Cup and Wyovanian would make an excellent AD.
User avatar
laxwyo
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 9464
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:27 am
Location: Rock Springs, WY
Has liked: 128 times
Been liked: 134 times

I'm sure if some fund existed, the tight asses in Cheyenne would see the income and then cut state funds
W-Y, Until I Die!
ragtimejoe1
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 5118
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
Has liked: 20 times
Been liked: 116 times

Great posts. Too bad the State wouldn't let us use a big chunk of the rainy day fund. It sits in account and generates interest. UW gets interest and initial money remains the State's.
WYO1016 wrote: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:10 am I'm starting to think that Burman has been laying the pipe to ragtimejoe1's wife
Insults are the last resort of fools with a crumbling position.
User avatar
BeaverPoke
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 8009
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:00 pm
Location: Corvallis, Oregon

ragtimejoe1 wrote:Great posts. Too bad the State wouldn't let us use a big chunk of the rainy day fund. It sits in account and generates interest. UW gets interest and initial money remains the State's.

Pretty sure they just said it is going to happen...
If you ever need to laugh, just remember there was some idiot who wanted Bohl fired after 2 seasons.
User avatar
WestWYOPoke
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3317
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:35 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 8 times

BeaverPoke wrote:
ragtimejoe1 wrote:Great posts. Too bad the State wouldn't let us use a big chunk of the rainy day fund. It sits in account and generates interest. UW gets interest and initial money remains the State's.

Pretty sure they just said it is going to happen...
If so it will be a small chunk, not a big one.
Image
User avatar
BackHarlowRoad
A Real Cowboy
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:35 pm
Location: Wyo
Been liked: 4 times

WestWYOPoke wrote:
BeaverPoke wrote:
ragtimejoe1 wrote:Great posts. Too bad the State wouldn't let us use a big chunk of the rainy day fund. It sits in account and generates interest. UW gets interest and initial money remains the State's.

Pretty sure they just said it is going to happen...
If so it will be a small chunk, not a big one.
A 0.025% chunk to be exact.
ragtimejoe1
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 5118
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
Has liked: 20 times
Been liked: 116 times

Does the rainy day fund currently generate revenue for the State? If so, how much?
WYO1016 wrote: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:10 am I'm starting to think that Burman has been laying the pipe to ragtimejoe1's wife
Insults are the last resort of fools with a crumbling position.
User avatar
laxwyo
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 9464
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:27 am
Location: Rock Springs, WY
Has liked: 128 times
Been liked: 134 times

Now, is this just from the interest it generates or from the actual fund? And is it going to an athletic trust or for operating expenses?
W-Y, Until I Die!
ragtimejoe1
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 5118
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
Has liked: 20 times
Been liked: 116 times

laxwyo wrote:Now, is this just from the interest it generates or from the actual fund? And is it going to an athletic trust or for operating expenses?
That is what I was getting at. Just letting us use the fund to generate interest. We keep the interest and they keep the fund.

If the fund is currently generating revenue for the state, then obviously the idea is dead in the water.
WYO1016 wrote: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:10 am I'm starting to think that Burman has been laying the pipe to ragtimejoe1's wife
Insults are the last resort of fools with a crumbling position.
User avatar
McPeachy
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 7914
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 2:04 pm
Has liked: 291 times
Been liked: 115 times

ragtimejoe1 wrote:Does the rainy day fund currently generate revenue for the State? If so, how much?
Sssshhhhhh. It's a secret. ;)
Dear Karma,

I have a list of people you missed...
Wyovanian
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Location: Wherever I'm At
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 16 times

TheCup wrote:
Wyovanian wrote: That's a pretty good, thorough answer, but there's a few possibilities left out of the argument- one is revenue enhancement (beer sales being one example). The other, very big one, would be HNW donor gift-based. A UW Athletics Endowment that generates funds on interest and investment. If we had even $25M to start, it could be expected to generate around $2.5M per annum with the near-term goal, through early reinvestment and contribution to get to $100M, generating about $10M per annum.

In short, there's more than one way to skin this mule.
I 100% agree. I mostly intended to show the FASTEST and most realistic way to get there, mostly because I'm feeling old. Not the ONLY way.

As I understand it, the best performing university endowments in the country grow at just under 10% annually. I believe most are around 3% or 4%. I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I think it's a great idea. If I was Burman I'd get on it tomorrow.

But even a $25M endowment that spins off 10% / year in revenue (which I think is outrageously optimistic) would add about $1.25 million to the pie if you devoted half the income to athletics and re-invested the other half. That, plus 2x season tickets, plus 2x CJC money, plus 2x student fees and we're just about there. And, at that rate, we'd be to a $100M endowment in maybe 30-50 years depending on the market.

I might not have that long. I eat poop of gluten.
In the short term- first, Burman should be the bane of the Trustee's and State's existence. The super squeaky wheel needing all the grease. He needs to sell the needs of his programs to the financial sources and subtly wield the donors, fans, students, and alumni as the voting threat. He's got to rally that base with a consistent message and a strong vision, then he's got to dovetail from the vision to the fans to the vision to the State.

Secondly, unless you have celiac disease, it's not the gluten. It's the carbs. Put the donuts down and pick up a protein shake!!!
"WE are the music makers and WE are the dreamers of the dreams." -Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
Post Reply