Frack money

[guest44]

My biggest problem with the Athletic Department, essentially since Paul Krebs left is that we seem to hire the same profile of person over and over.

What is the appreciable, professional difference between Christopher, Kingston, Moosebrugger & DVDM?

The overarching conversation in each search was exactly the same. “BG needs to raise funds, and the right candidate needs to be a fundraiser”. Meanwhile, college athletics was undergoing massive changes during this time and each of these candidates would fire a coach or two and then pay the new coach much more money to be between mediocre to the bottom of the MAC.

These changes were not unpredictable, unless you built your career in a profession…college athletic administration…that actively trying to fight them.

As a result, our athletic department has been rudderless for over 20 years. Over that time, the product on & off the field completely eroded.

Quite frankly, when DVDM leaves, and believe me, he will after he gives himself and other raises from the Sac St. pay day loan he is about to get, we would be better off hiring someone with less experience in college athletics who may be younger, less experienced and not afraid to ignore the administrative blob we’ve hired in the past.
[/quote]


While that I agree that an outside the box approach is greatly needed, the current administration outside of athletics is the last who is going to do that type of hire. The football program has been a complete disaster after Mazey, and that’s not a coincidence. You can blame coaches over and over, but this school is not led with tools needed to sustain success in today’s college athletics. Smoke and mirrors always get exposed. If social media posts were wins and losses, they would tops in the MAC. However, accountability and commitment aren’t social media posts.

[OSUFALCON]

My biggest problem with the Athletic Department, essentially since Paul Krebs left is that we seem to hire the same profile of person over and over.

What is the appreciable, professional difference between Christopher, Kingston, Moosebrugger & DVDM?

The overarching conversation in each search was exactly the same. “BG needs to raise funds, and the right candidate needs to be a fundraiser”. Meanwhile, college athletics was undergoing massive changes during this time and each of these candidates would fire a coach or two and then pay the new coach much more money to be between mediocre to the bottom of the MAC.

These changes were not unpredictable, unless you built your career in a profession…college athletic administration…that actively trying to fight them.

As a result, our athletic department has been rudderless for over 20 years. Over that time, the product on & off the field completely eroded.

Quite frankly, when DVDM leaves, and believe me, he will after he gives himself and other raises from the Sac St. pay day loan he is about to get, we would be better off hiring someone with less experience in college athletics who may be younger, less experienced and not afraid to ignore the administrative blob we’ve hired in the past.

While that I agree that an outside the box approach is greatly needed, the current administration outside of athletics is the last who is going to do that type of hire. The football program has been a complete disaster after Mazey, and that’s not a coincidence. You can blame coaches over and over, but this school is not led with tools needed to sustain success in today’s college athletics. Smoke and mirrors always get exposed. If social media posts were wins and losses, they would tops in the MAC. However, accountability and commitment aren’t social media posts.
[/quote]

With a forecasted budget deficit within the athletic department forecast to be in excess of $7,000,000 in 2026 what do you think the AD or Administration should do? Spend more money and add that to the student fees? The race to record budget deficits is a race BGSU doesn’t want to win.

[guest44]

That’s a really good question. It is probably the worst possible time to have an AD who is so singularly focused and dug in on football. I think even the biggest diehard football fans would admit the math doesn’t add up. Plus, the product itself has gotten much worse. Kent and Akron have made the sport secondary for years and BGSU is no further in front of them in the sport in 2026. The student fees are going up in fiscal 2027 and I’m assuming a lot of that is going to athletics. BGSU has added staff to almost every sport the past two years, what have been the results of that? Not much. The travel and equipment costs have skyrocketed recently to. I don’t know the answer to what you do, but being mediocre to bad at a lot of things, isn’t the answer. As for men’s basketball itself, BGSU could use the usual MAC coaching turnover that has happened forever. If Groce, Steele, Tod and Senderhoff all stay in place, those programs aren’t going anywhere and the climb is much more difficult.

[maskedopining]

That’s a really good question. It is probably the worst possible time to have an AD who is so singularly focused and dug in on football. I think even the biggest diehard football fans would admit the math doesn’t add up. Plus, the product itself has gotten much worse. Kent and Akron have made the sport secondary for years and BGSU is no further in front of them in the sport in 2026. The student fees are going up in fiscal 2027 and I’m assuming a lot of that is going to athletics. BGSU has added staff to almost every sport the past two years, what have been the results of that? Not much. The travel and equipment costs have skyrocketed recently to. I don’t know the answer to what you do, but being mediocre to bad at a lot of things, isn’t the answer. As for men’s basketball itself, BGSU could use the usual MAC coaching turnover that has happened forever. If Groce, Steele, Tod and Senderhoff all stay in place, those programs aren’t going anywhere and the climb is much more difficult.

Guest 44 & OSU Falcon - both of you have brought up good points and very good questions in response.

My only point of defense to my “outside of the box” point I made is OSU’s question of “what is an AD supposed to do?”, is exactly the problem that everyone who is spent their entire career in athletic administration uses as their defense. My argument is not to hire someone less qualified, but to hire someone with less experience in what seems to be quickly becoming the wrong experience. If I was a trustee, which I am not, this would be my push.

In terms of the debt, running a debt to maintain and build facilities and infrastructure has been the primary business model in all D1 athletic departments for the past 15-20 years. Even the big programs…see OSU’s athletic debts. They could do this because borrowing was very cheap and they could count on donors to help because their money largely wasn’t going to players. At least not in the way it does now.

Of course, I want to acknowledge your points. The reality is that this a systematic issue and the reality you pose, the university leadership, NCAA, etc., in your posts are very large and real obstacles.

[BleedOrange]

That’s a really good question. It is probably the worst possible time to have an AD who is so singularly focused and dug in on football. I think even the biggest diehard football fans would admit the math doesn’t add up. Plus, the product itself has gotten much worse. Kent and Akron have made the sport secondary for years and BGSU is no further in front of them in the sport in 2026. The student fees are going up in fiscal 2027 and I’m assuming a lot of that is going to athletics. BGSU has added staff to almost every sport the past two years, what have been the results of that? Not much. The travel and equipment costs have skyrocketed recently to. I don’t know the answer to what you do, but being mediocre to bad at a lot of things, isn’t the answer. As for men’s basketball itself, BGSU could use the usual MAC coaching turnover that has happened forever. If Groce, Steele, Tod and Senderhoff all stay in place, those programs aren’t going anywhere and the climb is much more difficult.

Guest 44 & OSU Falcon - both of you have brought up good points and very good questions in response.

My only point of defense to my “outside of the box” point I made is OSU’s question of “what is an AD supposed to do?”, is exactly the problem that everyone who is spent their entire career in athletic administration uses as their defense. My argument is not to hire someone less qualified, but to hire someone with less experience in what seems to be quickly becoming the wrong experience. If I was a trustee, which I am not, this would be my push.

In terms of the debt, running a debt to maintain and build facilities and infrastructure has been the primary business model in all D1 athletic departments for the past 15-20 years. Even the big programs…see OSU’s athletic debts. They could do this because borrowing was very cheap and they could count on donors to help because their money largely wasn’t going to players. At least not in the way it does now.

Of course, I want to acknowledge your points. The reality is that this a systematic issue and the reality you pose, the university leadership, NCAA, etc., in your posts are very large and real obstacles.

This, too, is a great point. It seems as though so many ADs that come thru BG are ossified into an outdated attitude for football that just doesn't work for the MAC. The fastest and most cost-efficient way to get wider recognition for BG sports is to emphasize men's basketball, and it is not even close.

[jpfalcon09]

BGSU had an operational budget just shy of $2.9M for men's basketball in FY25, good enough for 9th in conference. The upper third of programs in the Horizon League are outspending BG in the sport (BG would be 5th in the Horizon), all of which do not compete in the bowl subdivision for football mind you. Can readily assume a good chunk of the Frack money is going towards that number (salaries, equipment/apparel, travel expenses, nutritional needs, etc.). Was a bit shocked the university is not committing more resources to the program. UMass tops the MAC at a whopping $6.3M, UB is second at $4.5M. My thinking is BG is using the Frack money to essentially fund MBB while diverting what would be its normal resources to other programs. Again, just an opinion.

FWIW, some of us in the know were told the NIL budget this year for MBB was $3M, a million of that went to Jevontae Campbell, allegedly. No idea who is contributing/running the NIL fund since the Ziggy Collective website is pretty much defunct at this point.

[guest44]

BGSU had an operational budget just shy of $2.9M for men's basketball in FY25, good enough for 9th in conference. The upper third of programs in the Horizon League are outspending BG in the sport (BG would be 5th in the Horizon), all of which do not compete in the bowl subdivision for football mind you. Can readily assume a good chunk of the Frack money is going towards that number (salaries, equipment/apparel, travel expenses, nutritional needs, etc.). Was a bit shocked the university is not committing more resources to the program. UMass tops the MAC at a whopping $6.3M, UB is second at $4.5M. My thinking is BG is using the Frack money to essentially fund MBB while diverting what would be its normal resources to other programs. Again, just an opinion.

FWIW, some of us in the know were told the NIL budget this year for MBB was $3M, a million of that went to Jevontae Campbell, allegedly. No idea who is contributing/running the NIL fund since the Ziggy Collective website is pretty much defunct at this point.

I agree with alot of what is said here, but I have no reason to believe that NIL number is near 3M. UMass is said to have the highest NIL around 1.2 to 1.5M, and Akron north of 1M. UMass also pays Frank Martin like 2M. Miami has obviously increased it and rumors surrounding Steele having wealthy in-laws might be part of that too. I don't know the total number, but Campbell's dad made it seem he was closer to 100K-150K plus living. A 3M NIL budget would be top in the MAC and on par with some bigger conferences.

[footballguy51]

That’s a really good question. It is probably the worst possible time to have an AD who is so singularly focused and dug in on football. I think even the biggest diehard football fans would admit the math doesn’t add up. Plus, the product itself has gotten much worse. Kent and Akron have made the sport secondary for years and BGSU is no further in front of them in the sport in 2026. The student fees are going up in fiscal 2027 and I’m assuming a lot of that is going to athletics. BGSU has added staff to almost every sport the past two years, what have been the results of that? Not much. The travel and equipment costs have skyrocketed recently to. I don’t know the answer to what you do, but being mediocre to bad at a lot of things, isn’t the answer. As for men’s basketball itself, BGSU could use the usual MAC coaching turnover that has happened forever. If Groce, Steele, Tod and Senderhoff all stay in place, those programs aren’t going anywhere and the climb is much more difficult.

Guest 44 & OSU Falcon - both of you have brought up good points and very good questions in response.

My only point of defense to my “outside of the box” point I made is OSU’s question of “what is an AD supposed to do?”, is exactly the problem that everyone who is spent their entire career in athletic administration uses as their defense. My argument is not to hire someone less qualified, but to hire someone with less experience in what seems to be quickly becoming the wrong experience. If I was a trustee, which I am not, this would be my push.

In terms of the debt, running a debt to maintain and build facilities and infrastructure has been the primary business model in all D1 athletic departments for the past 15-20 years. Even the big programs…see OSU’s athletic debts. They could do this because borrowing was very cheap and they could count on donors to help because their money largely wasn’t going to players. At least not in the way it does now.

Of course, I want to acknowledge your points. The reality is that this a systematic issue and the reality you pose, the university leadership, NCAA, etc., in your posts are very large and real obstacles.

This, too, is a great point. It seems as though so many ADs that come thru BG are ossified into an outdated attitude for football that just doesn't work for the MAC. The fastest and most cost-efficient way to get wider recognition for BG sports is to emphasize men's basketball, and it is not even close.

The hard part is, if you look at the popularity of sports in our nation, football is #1 and it's not really that close. So, schools want to be at least respectable in football and, hopefully, really good. It's been mentioned that Akron and Kent have basically given up on being even mediocre in football, and clearly their basketball teams are really good. However, when you think about the institutions themselves, people see them as jokes because they think about football first, not basketball. And, although hockey is a big deal here and is an excellent opportunity for us to win a title, it doesn't make as much of an impact in the national landscape.

In a time where Ohio's demographics are shifting, BGSU is leading the way in enrollment increases. We are doing the right thing on the academic side, and although the athletic results aren't where we would like them right now, we are doing good things. Student attendance at football was way up, and it certainly wasn't the product on the field (aside from the band...that's a show!). Yes, it was because of a cat, but it was also because we marketed the crap out of a Heisman winning coach, a phenomenal band...and a cat.

Us old timers want to see wins and a quality product on the field/court/rink. The students want to have fun and feel like they belong and are included. It's just how it works. Schools like An Ohio State or Michigan don't have to focus on the belonging and inclusion stuff, and they don't need to hype up the gimmicks, because they have an established brand of success and the students that go to the games want to watch the product. If we can get to a point where we consistently have a high-quality product, then we won't need the gimmicks. Hockey has that following, even if recent results haven't been what we want, because we've established that program over the years and we even have a national title. If you go to a hockey game, we don't do the gimmicks, and the students are there for the game, not for a carnival experience. Akron has won three straight MAC tournament titles. Their students are starting to go to the games to watch them play, not for some sideshow. If Akron can start making noise in the tournament instead of bowing out in the first round, that will help to establish them as a program and eventually eliminate the need for any gimmicky sideshows.

[jpfalcon09]

BGSU had an operational budget just shy of $2.9M for men's basketball in FY25, good enough for 9th in conference. The upper third of programs in the Horizon League are outspending BG in the sport (BG would be 5th in the Horizon), all of which do not compete in the bowl subdivision for football mind you. Can readily assume a good chunk of the Frack money is going towards that number (salaries, equipment/apparel, travel expenses, nutritional needs, etc.). Was a bit shocked the university is not committing more resources to the program. UMass tops the MAC at a whopping $6.3M, UB is second at $4.5M. My thinking is BG is using the Frack money to essentially fund MBB while diverting what would be its normal resources to other programs. Again, just an opinion.

FWIW, some of us in the know were told the NIL budget this year for MBB was $3M, a million of that went to Jevontae Campbell, allegedly. No idea who is contributing/running the NIL fund since the Ziggy Collective website is pretty much defunct at this point.

I agree with alot of what is said here, but I have no reason to believe that NIL number is near 3M. UMass is said to have the highest NIL around 1.2 to 1.5M, and Akron north of 1M. UMass also pays Frank Martin like 2M. Miami has obviously increased it and rumors surrounding Steele having wealthy in-laws might be part of that too. I don't know the total number, but Campbell's dad made it seem he was closer to 100K-150K plus living. A 3M NIL budget would be top in the MAC and on par with some bigger conferences.

It's more likely the total NIL budget for the university is $3M, which would probably make a bit more sense. Would be helpful if that information was made public for all universities instead of relying on hearsay.

[guest44]

That would make sense. Men's basketball has found some money clearly. The talent brought in shows they are not at the bottom of the MAC for sure. It should be public information, but they would fight that claiming they are still students.

[BillyLP]

That’s a really good question. It is probably the worst possible time to have an AD who is so singularly focused and dug in on football. I think even the biggest diehard football fans would admit the math doesn’t add up. Plus, the product itself has gotten much worse. Kent and Akron have made the sport secondary for years and BGSU is no further in front of them in the sport in 2026. The student fees are going up in fiscal 2027 and I’m assuming a lot of that is going to athletics. BGSU has added staff to almost every sport the past two years, what have been the results of that? Not much. The travel and equipment costs have skyrocketed recently to. I don’t know the answer to what you do, but being mediocre to bad at a lot of things, isn’t the answer. As for men’s basketball itself, BGSU could use the usual MAC coaching turnover that has happened forever. If Groce, Steele, Tod and Senderhoff all stay in place, those programs aren’t going anywhere and the climb is much more difficult.

Guest 44 & OSU Falcon - both of you have brought up good points and very good questions in response.

My only point of defense to my “outside of the box” point I made is OSU’s question of “what is an AD supposed to do?”, is exactly the problem that everyone who is spent their entire career in athletic administration uses as their defense. My argument is not to hire someone less qualified, but to hire someone with less experience in what seems to be quickly becoming the wrong experience. If I was a trustee, which I am not, this would be my push.

In terms of the debt, running a debt to maintain and build facilities and infrastructure has been the primary business model in all D1 athletic departments for the past 15-20 years. Even the big programs…see OSU’s athletic debts. They could do this because borrowing was very cheap and they could count on donors to help because their money largely wasn’t going to players. At least not in the way it does now.

Of course, I want to acknowledge your points. The reality is that this a systematic issue and the reality you pose, the university leadership, NCAA, etc., in your posts are very large and real obstacles.

Okay, okay....I'll do it.

[mbenecke]

That’s a really good question. It is probably the worst possible time to have an AD who is so singularly focused and dug in on football. I think even the biggest diehard football fans would admit the math doesn’t add up. Plus, the product itself has gotten much worse. Kent and Akron have made the sport secondary for years and BGSU is no further in front of them in the sport in 2026. The student fees are going up in fiscal 2027 and I’m assuming a lot of that is going to athletics. BGSU has added staff to almost every sport the past two years, what have been the results of that? Not much. The travel and equipment costs have skyrocketed recently to. I don’t know the answer to what you do, but being mediocre to bad at a lot of things, isn’t the answer. As for men’s basketball itself, BGSU could use the usual MAC coaching turnover that has happened forever. If Groce, Steele, Tod and Senderhoff all stay in place, those programs aren’t going anywhere and the climb is much more difficult.

Guest 44 & OSU Falcon - both of you have brought up good points and very good questions in response.

My only point of defense to my “outside of the box” point I made is OSU’s question of “what is an AD supposed to do?”, is exactly the problem that everyone who is spent their entire career in athletic administration uses as their defense. My argument is not to hire someone less qualified, but to hire someone with less experience in what seems to be quickly becoming the wrong experience. If I was a trustee, which I am not, this would be my push.

In terms of the debt, running a debt to maintain and build facilities and infrastructure has been the primary business model in all D1 athletic departments for the past 15-20 years. Even the big programs…see OSU’s athletic debts. They could do this because borrowing was very cheap and they could count on donors to help because their money largely wasn’t going to players. At least not in the way it does now.

Of course, I want to acknowledge your points. The reality is that this a systematic issue and the reality you pose, the university leadership, NCAA, etc., in your posts are very large and real obstacles.

Okay, okay....I'll do it.

#HireBilly

[Flipper]

The increase in football attendance is also driven by record enrollment and a concerted effort from the department to attract students to the games.

[maskedopining]

That’s a really good question. It is probably the worst possible time to have an AD who is so singularly focused and dug in on football. I think even the biggest diehard football fans would admit the math doesn’t add up. Plus, the product itself has gotten much worse. Kent and Akron have made the sport secondary for years and BGSU is no further in front of them in the sport in 2026. The student fees are going up in fiscal 2027 and I’m assuming a lot of that is going to athletics. BGSU has added staff to almost every sport the past two years, what have been the results of that? Not much. The travel and equipment costs have skyrocketed recently to. I don’t know the answer to what you do, but being mediocre to bad at a lot of things, isn’t the answer. As for men’s basketball itself, BGSU could use the usual MAC coaching turnover that has happened forever. If Groce, Steele, Tod and Senderhoff all stay in place, those programs aren’t going anywhere and the climb is much more difficult.

Guest 44 & OSU Falcon - both of you have brought up good points and very good questions in response.

My only point of defense to my “outside of the box” point I made is OSU’s question of “what is an AD supposed to do?”, is exactly the problem that everyone who is spent their entire career in athletic administration uses as their defense. My argument is not to hire someone less qualified, but to hire someone with less experience in what seems to be quickly becoming the wrong experience. If I was a trustee, which I am not, this would be my push.

In terms of the debt, running a debt to maintain and build facilities and infrastructure has been the primary business model in all D1 athletic departments for the past 15-20 years. Even the big programs…see OSU’s athletic debts. They could do this because borrowing was very cheap and they could count on donors to help because their money largely wasn’t going to players. At least not in the way it does now.

Of course, I want to acknowledge your points. The reality is that this a systematic issue and the reality you pose, the university leadership, NCAA, etc., in your posts are very large and real obstacles.

Okay, okay....I'll do it.

Yes!! 100%. I mean…why not do it?

[fanatic13]

One Day really shows the state of the program. Bottom half for sports, way behind any other ticketed sport, and zero challenges. Sad we don't have a big enough donor sign up or organized to make a challenge but that's where we're at