This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Well reasoned and stated.
The loan was forced on RG. CU was the only school to take it. Why? Because every other PAC 12 school stepped up and covered the budget shortfall. Not at CU. DiStefano refused to do what every other school in our own conference was willing to do.
I think there is a lot of evidence that Phil D is the start and end of every problem at CU.
Then Phil said that KD & RG couldn't make certain personnel changes because of the optics of taking that loan & then having new dead money on the books.
Because we are better than Cal, UCLA and UW in that way!
Do you live in the Cities? Because you nailed this like you do. This is pretty much spot on and goes to show why an excellent coach like Fleck dumped some dead coaching weight this offseason.
The CU AD had been in the black for many years proving fiscal responsibility. This was an unprecedented time where ever other university in the conference chose to cover their athletic department so they did not have to take out a loan. CU did not. Not sure how you can defend this.
The AD department is not the only department struggling financially due to Covid. There is nothing wrong with taking a loan. Well it depends on the terms of the loan.
We don’t know it but CU and their peer institutions across the PAC12 know what the terms were. This is either a case of CU being wiser and more opportunistic than their peers, taking great advantage of a lucrative offer of $ or CU being forced to do something that no other peer institution was willing to undertake.
I think Hokie has that info. If not Hokie, then maybe Miami.
Is it, though? When 11 of 12 schools step up and cover the shortfall, and you’re the 12th team, what does that say about that level of support provided? We are placing unnecessary restrictions on ourselves and making it harder to compete with our peers. That’s dumb in any line of work. The cost of that loan is largely irrelevant when you’re the only one paying it.
Yes, I think it's still hard to make that judgement.
FCS level thinking and actions. Might as well make the move. Just think of the success we could have there!
It’s an unsound decision because we are the only ones taking it. Doing so puts us immediately at a financial disadvantage with our peers. It wouldn’t matter if it was a zero interest loan. As long as the expectation is to repay it, it was a bad choice.
ok. you're the SME on financial loans. I trust you know what you're talking about.
www.mercurynews.com
I am not an expert in this area but that seems like a good rate over 10 years. However, I'd imagine most Schools aren't charging their athletic departments interest on loans or very minimal, but CU will be CU.
I thought the "out of state tuition" thing was debunked.
Wow... hot take. Way to take a stand.
It’s also a stupid, uninformed take. Loans are used to improve something - either buy something or to take advantage of favorable terms that come with paying now instead of later. This loan does neither of those things. All it does is encumber the athletic department while EVERY OTHER TEAM IN OUR CONFERENCE avoids the same type of encumbrance. It’s spectacularly stupid. If we are wondering why RG is mailing it in, it’s because the idiot he reports to has made it virtually impossible for him to do the things that he knows need to be done in order to be successful. But he’s still getting paid, so why not mail it in? The consequences to him are nothing more than a hit to his reputation, and honestly, when you’re making that kind of money, who cares?
Hate to say it, but bing bong is correct here. It is dependent on the terms of the loan.
CU and financial acumen do not belong in the same sentence
Well, I am waiting to see what this new coaching staff's salary pool has increased to because the quality has increased significantly. If the only way they were able to increase it to this point was to take a loan, I would say it's being used to improve something, arguably the most important thing to the success of the program. Maybe they also used it to help boost the recruiting infrastructure and hire new folks in that department. Both of those would qualify as investing in the program with the goal of seeing a good ROI.
