Arena comment at the end of UBs show

[Billikenbooster]

At the end of the show there was a last question about the arena, and UB said the rejents were having a meeting this weekend to discuss the arena project, among other things. looks like this will be the meeting to decide if we go or not at this time on the project.

this sort of came out of the blue. anyone else hear anything about the big meeting this w/e?

mhg

[StLouBlue]

The board meets 4 times a year and I am pretty sure the arena has been a topic for the board at least the last couple of years. I am not really expecting any news from this. What is holding up the arena so far is the money. I guess maybe timelines could be adjusted or new plans considered, but I would guess we would have heard rumors of those things long before now.

[Cowboy]

-someone posted earlier that there is a regents mtg this week

-ub seemed a bit sheepish about what he was saying, the frustration of answering the question of when will it be built

-i have to think there is a fund somewhere in slu endowment land that can give $10mil to the construction of this project so ground can be broken while this semester is in session or we will be laughinstocks, imo

[AlumniFan]

Trustees meet at the end of the week. Many of the people who come in town for this meeting are in town for other University related meetings. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the meeting. I think we are getting closer to a point of no return.

[Schasz]

I suppose that it is safe to assume that no big donor is coming forward to get the Arena project over the top. It would really be too bad if this thing crumbles, but it probably should not have been announced in the first place without a major donor commiting.

[DoctorB]

I think that from the beginning the administration made its projections based on certain amounts of $$$--yes?

If so why would SLU be a laughingstock if it holds to that commitment to raise the $$$? Frankly, the approach makes good fiscal sense. My guess would be that they are going to hold out a little longer until the money grows.

I also wonder if basketball fanaticism is the correct lens through which we should view, and judge, this project. That would seem pretty limiting to me. I actually find all of the hand-wringing about the Arena on this site kind of amusing, and possibly symptomatic of a sort of basketball idolatry that distorts the primary goals of a university. Surely some others on this list would agree that fanaticism can distort our vision a little? I guess what I am saying is, I love basketball too, but have no problem waiting until we get the full amount of $$$ targeted before we start. What is wrong with that?

Actually, unlike the fanatic basketball fans on this site, virtually no faculty members on campus (besides me) seem even mildly interested in whether the building breaks ground this spring or next. It is just my observation, but it is a non-issue among faculty. That said, I doubt if the regents care very much what faculty members think about this project.

And by the way -- the endowment of SLU is a totally unrelated item in this discussion. Why do several people keep bringing up the endowment? It has no relevance to the arena project.

[willie]

At the last Billiken Club Meeting Mark Wright also mention the Board of Trustee Meeting hinting or at least hoping that they arena would get clearance at that time. I will be very surprised if a ground breaking date is not chosen at this time. For all of you sceptics the building will be built starting this year.

[bonwich]

No special consideration given to basketball/athletics, DoctorB. I daresay if Larry had announced three years ago a series of endowed professorships that would be available by 2005, and today the U. was still trying to fund those professorships, you and your colleagues might be taking him to task.

When this thing was announced, among other things there was a timetable projected, including something said about the arena being open to coincide with our entry into the A-10. I bet Kevin and Tommie both expected to be playing in the arena, which now seems at best a possibility for their senior seasons. Brad has been placed in the uncomfortable position of telling a bunch of recruits "hey, we're getting great facilities," and basically having to renege on that promise. (Not to mention there's still no clear explanation of whether the teams are getting a practice facility on a par with Marquette, etc.)

I also need to recheck it, but I believe I found a document on SLU's web site that indicates there is, in fact, an annual spend-down available on the endowment.

(Edit: Found it! The endowment has had spending draws in the following amounts from 2001-2006, with the 2006 number a projection. I don't know what the parameters are for these draws, but it does appear that the endowment can be tapped for some causes.)

(53.6) (54.3) (53.6) (50.8) (36.1) (31.1)

[DoctorB]

thanks for the rational response to my post. I often get heated responses, so it encourages me that someone would actually hear me out.

No special consideration given to basketball/athletics,

>DoctorB. I daresay if Larry had announced three years ago a

>series of endowed professorships that would be available by

>2005, and today the U. was still trying to fund those

>professorships, you and your colleagues might be taking him

>to task.

Mr. Bonwich: we take the SLU Administration to task on a very regular basis. It is in fact part of our job. My point is precisely illustrated by your excellent example. If it were something that professors felt strongly about, such as endowed chairs, you better believe we would take him to task. That is exactly my point--hardly any professors I know feel strongly about the Arena. In fact the opposite--it is not on anyone's radar screen, at least in my working world.

I'm sorry if promises were made to student athletes that may not come true. "The website" also touts our campus as the top Catholic university, so dubious promises are regularly being made to every student who enrolls here. Yes it sucks; but one of my specialties is rhetoric, and so I can tell you that this is not unusual in the world of human communications.

Yes, let's protest. However. . . .

There are lots of credibility issues here on campus. Early in his career here Fr. Biondi stated that SLU would become the top catholic university in the world! How credible is that!!??? Building the arena is pretty far down the pike in relation to many other things related to that issue, but I do not see anyone too worried about that promise.

>

>I also need to recheck it, but I believe I found a document

>on SLU's web site that indicates there is, in fact, an

>annual spend-down available on the endowment. . . . I don't know what the parameters are for these

>draws, but it does appear that the endowment can be tapped

>for some causes.)

Of course it can be tapped. Usually for general budget issues. But do not call the New York Times! My point: how is that relevant to the Arena? I, for one, would be opposed to using the endowment for the Arena project, and I daresya 99% of the professors here at SLU would agree.

[cheeseman]

Before this turns into a big discussion about spending down endowments or not lets look at this issue from 2 sides: 1. You can say you need the money up front or 2. you can say you will get the money on the backside. Lets look at the first one: Waiting to get all the money may sound fiscally sound but may not be. Interest rates are rising and construction materials are also going up faster than the rate of inflation. We have somewhere around $27 million if not a little more and the target was $35 million. If interest rates go up 1-2% and construction costs rise at 7-10% (don't laugh that is what bidders of projects are building in and that is conservative according to them) then waiting to get the remaining $7-8 million might be penny wise and pound foolish since we will be chasing a moving target. Now lets look at the second approach: Announce groundbreaking now - lock in the interest rates which would save you over 1/4 of the borrowing cost on the project if you wait and have to finance at a higher rate - this money could then be used to pay for the slightly higher borrowing principal to get started. With construction costs rising at a 7-10% rate per year then by waiting, you end up adding $7 million more to the overall cost of the project per year at a minimum which will require more fund raising or cutting on the project. It seems to me that SLU would be better off moving ahead with the money they got, locking in construction costs and interest rates now. SLU can then put together a PSL or Billiken Club membership strategy that would over time (5 years) raise the remaining money. This would also allow them to continue fund raising - fund raising always goes easier when you can see the project actually happening rather than as a potential concept.

[Box and Won]

An aside: I have no problem with Fr. Biondi's goal to become the best Catholic university in the country. The university has consistently improved since he took over, and there's every indication that it will continue to do so. While we may never reach Notre Dame or BC status, only good things can come out of striving to be the best we can be. (Hell, we should at least be able to pass Fordham in the rankings at some point, making us the #4 Catholic university. )

[knight_rider]

Announce ground-breaking now and you close the gap toward the 35 million mark because there are still quite a few donors who will not give unless they know this thing is going to happen.

Side note: On 670AM out of Chicago last night they interviewed Jerry Wainwright, Depaul's Head Coach, and he explained his team's inability to hit free-throws vs. Villanova and their overall poor shooting. He attributes their lackluster shooting to the fact they practice in a small facility and play their games in All-State Arena, where they only get to shoot on game day. Does this sound familiar?

[bonwich]

>That is exactly my point--hardly any professors I

>know feel strongly about the Arena. In fact the

>opposite--it is not on anyone's radar screen, at least in my

>working world. (italics added)

With all due respect, Doc, your working world is within the ivory tower. I know where you're coming from -- my old man worked there for 30-some years. But what we're talking about on this board is the perception of the University to the outside world as it pertains to the very public pronouncements its president has made about building a new arena and "continuing our commitment to Midtown and the City of St. Louis," or words to that effect.

>"The website" also touts our campus as the

>top Catholic university, so dubious promises are regularly

>being made to every student who enrolls here. Yes it sucks;

> but one of my specialties is rhetoric, and so I can tell

>you that this is not unusual in the world of human

>communications.

I think you've misquoted. The stated goal is "becoming the finest Catholic university in the nation by the year 2012" (Biondi, 2004 address and elsewhere). A nice, vague word, "finest." In the same address, Larry cited the top priority -- the research building -- as well as "plans" for the arena. Unfortunately, he had also previously provided a timetable for those plans, one that he hasn't exactly stuck to.

>There are lots of credibility issues here on campus. Early

>in his career here Fr. Biondi stated that SLU would become

>the top catholic university in the world! How credible is

>that!!???

Again, I think you need to cite sources. When Larry first got here, the very first public pronouncement he made was repositioning the U. as "The Jesuit University of the Midwest." (I know this for a fact because I helped him write the ad, which also gave birth to all those "Scholarship and Research," "Service and Spirituality," "blah blah blah" banners that lined Lindell and Grand for many years.) I asked him if he'd consulted with the president of Loyola about the claim, and he responded with something between a snarl and a giggle. In any event, I give him credit for at least quantifying some sort of goal, which eventually evolved into the whole "finest Catholic University in the nation" thang, which he still has six years to achieve.

>Of course it can be tapped. Usually for general budget

>issues. But do not call the New York Times! My point: how

>is that relevant to the Arena? I, for one, would be opposed

>to using the endowment for the Arena project, and I daresay

>99% of the professors here at SLU would agree.

Your initial quote:

>And by the way -- the endowment of SLU is a totally unrelated item >in this discussion. Why do several people keep bringing up the >endowment? It has no relevance to the arena project.

I'd submit that just because you and "99% of the professors" would be opposed to using endowment funds for the arena project doesn't mean that it "has no relevance." I think the most likely scenario would be a loan guaranteed by the endowment to enhance the already-raised funds and get the project off the dime, so to speak. You can argue (and I probably would, too) that that would set a bad precedent, but I can also see it as a short-term, stopgap solution that would have relatively low risk and would reinforce the U's ability to keep its word.

I don't think Larry is either a saint or a sinner, and I think he's blown more than a few things along the way. The biggest thing I've learned in the current set of threads is that "third-largest endowment of any Catholic university in America." That's a hell of an achievement, one of which the Zags and the Creightons and the Marquettes and even the Georgetowns of the world are probably quite envious. I'm going with the theory that a rising tide raises all boats.

[DoctorB]

>An aside: I have no problem with Fr. Biondi's goal to become

>the best Catholic university in the country. The university

>has consistently improved since he took over, and there's

>every indication that it will continue to do so. While we

>may never reach Notre Dame or BC status, only good things

>can come out of striving to be the best we can be.

But those are 2 different goals. should our goal be to be the best we can be, or to be the #1 Catholic university? I have a problem with stating our goal is to be the top Catholic university, if in fact it will never happen. In that case, and if that is a plausible conclusion, then stating that goal is pure drivel. How could we ever truly "reach Notre Dame or BC status" if they are already so far ahead of us, and committted to staying there?? It is like starting a marathon race 10 miles behind the leaders, and announcing we intend to win, or at least catch up. It sounds , in other words, ridiculous.

[Box and Won]

I don't really look at them as being two different goals - aim to be the best, and see what happens. Identify areas in which we stand the best chance of closing the gap between us and the schools ahead of us and plug away. Perhaps, when it's all said and done, we are not the finest Catholic university in the country, but we'll sure be better off than we were before. Leo Burnett had a famous quote, "When you reach for the stars, you might not get one, but you won't come up with a handful of mud either."

[courtside]

Well put Bonwich.

What I think Doctor B fails to see...and I can always provide this more specifically if he likes...are the BENEFITS of a winning and successful, committed hoops program at SLU, as a whole.

University morale rises exponentially. General applications rise, and the school becomes more selective for students as a whole. This has happened at other places. The positive exposure of the school to help those rhetoric programs can in part come from a successful basketball program.

Academics at a university do not have to be compromised with a commitment to athletics. Many fine institutions do both.

[Schasz]

Willie,

All good Billiken basketball fans sure hope that is true.

[DoctorB]

What I think Doctor B fails to see...and I can always

>provide this more specifically if he likes...are the

>BENEFITS of a winning and successful, committed hoops

>program at SLU, as a whole.

thanks for all the good responses so far.

I am not sure why you think I fail to see that. In fact, I have some serious doubts about whatever benefits you might attribute to a successful program. I am hardly alone on that.

You list a few interesting possibilities. We have had this debate before on this list, by the way. thanks for you good input, though--I just am not sure I agree it would add that many benefits.

[Bay Area Billiken]

I think a good, winning team in a clean program adds a sense of optimism and a positive attitude at a university. It is good for morale, in my opinion.

When I first moved to the West Coast, the University of San Francisco, a fellow Jesuit university in a big city, was in the midst of its self-imposed cancellation of its men's basketball program after repeated alleged violations. I was told that the social life at the school suffered, as that basketball team was missed. The team has since been restored, but it has never reached the same level of play or talent as before the ban. That being said, I regard USF as a sleeping giant on the West Coast in basketball. And old War Memorial Gym was a madhouse for the Gonzaga game this year.

[billikenmetz]

There will never be an "Arena" built on campus. Period.

[Box and Won]

I'd be interested in seeing if there is a correlation between winning basketball and alumni giving. We're in the middle of the 27% by '07 campaign, and it sounds like we're around the 20% mark, which is up from 16% (I think). Comparable schools like Creighton (29%), Villanova (34%), Xavier, Marquette, all have considerably higher alumni giving rates than SLU as well as traditionally strong basketball programs. I'm not implying that basketball is the only reason why people give back to their alma maters, but I'm sure that the school pride that comes with successful athletics plays some role.

[bonwich]

http://www.gonzaga.edu/about/Message+from+...Summer+2004.asp

Gonzaga's prez lays the increase in endowment and academic prestige squarely at the feet of its basketball program.

However, as noted in a prior thread, Gonzaga's endowment, even now, is approximately ONE-FIFTH that of SLU's.

I'd also tend to side more with DoctorB than with courtside regarding the ultimate effects of a good basketball team. Sure, it makes it more fun for many people -- but the whole "better pool of students" thing is, eventually, a mathematical impossibility. It's not like the students who are already going to highly selective schools (the vast majority of whom don't exactly place a high priority on reaching the Final Four) are somehow going to include SLU in their list just because all of a sudden we have a good basketball team. (Put another way: How many of the current "Top 50" basketball programs have "Top 50" academic reputations?)

From my perspective, right now the whole thing does come down to credibility more than anything. I've been a vocal skeptic regarding the relative merits of the new arena since it was first being seriously debated about five years ago. Nonetheless, the powers-that-be at the U. stated a course, and thus far they've failed to live up to that course. We're not shooting for the best-of-the-best in terms of our facilities -- we're merely trying to get up to around average, and the stated path for that has been to build an on-campus arena. (As an aside -- if we still have to practice regularly in West Pine after the new arena is built, the entire Board of Directors should be forced to resign.)

[Bay Area Billiken]

There can really be no question that the basketball team at Gonzaga has put that school on the map.

Gonzaga is Spokane, Washington, just about as far removed from the East Coast media markets as possible.

[Box and Won]

Interesting.

I'm not sure I buy the "better students" argument either, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility to suggest that athletic success could positively impact the percentage of admitted students who enroll.

[courtside]

http://www.marquette.edu/opa/newsroom/news...emand1606.shtml

Fr. Wild Marquette University President has attributed the men's basketball program as a big part of this succes.