LU is playing its first game against Fordham right now in it's newly updated Gentile Center. The game is being televised on Lakeshore Public TV, ESPN3, and the HL Network. I have been to the old GC. It was nothing more than a high school gym. From what I can tell so far, the newly revamped facility looks beautiful.
Article and picture from the Chicago Tribune:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-25/sports/ct-spt-1126-loyola-gentile-arena--20111126_1_ben-averkamp-alumni-gym-ramblers (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-25/sports/ct-spt-1126-loyola-gentile-arena--20111126_1_ben-averkamp-alumni-gym-ramblers)
The game announcers said the revamp cost was $100 Million.
I believe the $100 million includes a new union and several other projects as well. It's a very nice looking arena, hopefully the ARC will be comparable to it someday.
Quote from: wh on November 26, 2011, 03:24:17 PM
LU is playing its first game against Fordham right now in it's newly updated Gentile Center. The game is being televised on Lakeshore Public TV, ESPN3, and the HL Network. I have been to the old GC. It was nothing more than a high school gym. From what I can tell so far, the newly revamped facility looks beautiful.
The facility looks very good, and it is interesting to note that the seating capacity is about the same as Valpo's. Perhaps this could be one model for consideration whenever there is future renovation of the ARC.
Fordham 50
Loyola 64
A nice win for the opening of their revamped Gentile Center.
The Ramblers were up at halftime 34-25. Joe Crisman had 14 points in 38 minutes and shot 4 of 6 from inside the arc and 2 of 4 beyond the arc. Ben Averkamp had 13 points in 31 minutes and shot 5 of 12 all inside the arc. He made 3 of 5 free throws. Denzel Brito had 11 points in 34 minutes and shot 3 of 4 from inside the arc and 1 of 3 from beyond the arc. Denzel made his 2 free throws. Five other players scored 7 or less points for Loyola. As a team Loyola shot 4 of 10 from trey and 52% overall.
Chris Gaston had 19 points for the Fordham Rams but no other player for the Rams was in double figures.
I can't help but feel a little jealous. Loyola has crap teams for the last several years. Their coaches and A.D. blame their facility, saying that it is killing recruiting. So what happens? The university responds and builds them a mini-palace. By the way, the original Gentile Center is only 15 year old, much newer that the ARC.
I know for a fact that Homer has been saying the same thing behind the scenes about the ARC. But, because he still found a way to put winning teams on the court, the university ignored him and put their money into anything and everything else over many years. Even now there is no plan on the books to do anything like what Loyola has done. People can say anything they want, but truth is Valparaiso University is NOT committed to providing competitive athletic facilities for its athletic programs and student athletes.
Quote from: wh on November 26, 2011, 07:09:46 PM
People can say anything they want, but truth is Valparaiso University is NOT committed to providing competitive athletic facilities for its athletic programs and student athletes.
The real truth is that there are members of the board of directors of Valparaiso University who don't care one iota about athletics at Valpo and would drop all sports (isn't that what Northeastern Illinois eventually did) if they could. So they don't give money for athletic facilities. Therefore you have someone who has $15 million to give to Valpo and he earmarks it all for the Chapel. Did anyone else go hmmmmmmm????
Quote from: historyman on November 26, 2011, 07:37:17 PM
Quote from: wh on November 26, 2011, 07:09:46 PM
People can say anything they want, but truth is Valparaiso University is NOT committed to providing competitive athletic facilities for its athletic programs and student athletes.
The real truth is that there are members of the board of directors of Valparaiso University who don't care one iota about athletics at Valpo and would drop all sports (isn't that what Northeastern Illinois eventually did) if they could. So they don't give money for athletic facilities. Therefore you have someone who has $15 million to give to Valpo and he earmarks it all for the Chapel. Did anyone else go hmmmmmmm????
i'm a firm supporter of vu athletics, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking the chapel doesn't need maintenance or upgrades.
Quote from: vuweathernerd on November 26, 2011, 07:45:18 PM
i'm a firm supporter of vu athletics, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking the chapel doesn't need maintenance or upgrades.
I can also tell you that even if the Chapel was not in need of maintenance or upgrades that money would not have gone to athletic facilities.
My example of the Chapel getting the money for needed upgrades was not a good one. What an observant person can see is that monies in the amounts that Valpo needs for athletic facilities is available but yet certain people don't give a penny for athletic facilities.
So tell us historyman, where did the money come from for the Brown Field improvements, the tennis center, the basketball practice facility, the new ARC floor or the new scoreboard? I'm guessing we are talking multiple millions on these projects. Small donors? I don't think so.
Inquiring minds want to know!!
Quote from: vu72 on November 26, 2011, 08:02:12 PM
So tell us historyman, where did the money come from for the Brown Field improvements, the tennis center, the basketball practice facility, the new ARC floor or the new scoreboard? I'm guessing we are talking multiple millions on these projects. Small donors? I don't think so.
Inquiring minds want to know!!
I believe you're guessing wrong. Do you really believe it cost multiple millions for these upgrades? Wasn't the new scoreboard paid for by the sponsor-McDonalds? Didn't someone who is not a board member give the money for the basketball practice facility? I seem to remember the ARC floor costing about 1/2 million not multiple millions. I have a feeling the tennis center cost about the same. The improvements to the football field were extensive but don't the players over the years pay for these with their tuition money because we don't give scholarships.
It is unfortunate that we don't have unlimited assets and endowment that can make a couple posters happy. We are a private university with a limited endowment. We had faciliteis and still do that are under competitive in major areas like residences, the Union classrooms, not just one of the newest buildings on campus the ARC. The Chapel was in bad need of repairs after over 50 years. It is the center of campus physically and mission-wise. The ARC itself is below today's standards for space utilization and revenue maximization. Everyone, that includes, the Board knows this, but unless you all who are so critical forgot we have been in a rescession for 3 years, and we have limited funds (and your willing to step up with $15 million), you just can't make $100 or $50 million available for a revamp immediately to meet the criticisms. The University recognizes it needs to revamp the main athletic facilities, including building a facility that meets the needs of most of the student body. There are studies to find the best solutions and the end result will be announced when it's time. You have read on this board the progress of that. Frankly, there are many on that Board who are some of the biggest supporters of Valpo athletics and Valpo basketball. Introduce yourself next time you're at a game or Homecoming or a Board weekend, or send them a thoughtful note. Just ripping them without engaging in dialogue about the conflicting priorities of a University is not productive.
Loyola was able to revamp the Gentile Center during a recession. Where did the money for their athletic facility come from? Where will students go to school when they tour campus facilities and see our athletic facilities are behind? The answer is a place such as Loyola who can upgrade their athletic facilities during a recession. They don't make excuses they get it done.
Quote from: valpo84 on November 26, 2011, 08:23:35 PM
It is unfortunate that we don't have unlimited assets and endowment that can make a couple posters happy. We are a private university with a limited endowment. We had faciliteis and still do that are under competitive in major areas like residences, the Union classrooms, not just one of the newest buildings on campus the ARC. The Chapel was in bad need of repairs after over 50 years. It is the center of campus physically and mission-wise. The ARC itself is below today's standards for space utilization and revenue maximization. Everyone, that includes, the Board knows this, but unless you all who are so critical forgot we have been in a rescession for 3 years, and we have limited funds (and your willing to step up with $15 million), you just can't make $100 or $50 million available for a revamp immediately to meet the criticisms. The University recognizes it needs to revamp the main athletic facilities, including building a facility that meets the needs of most of the student body. There are studies to find the best solutions and the end result will be announced when it's time. You have read on this board the progress of that. Frankly, there are many on that Board who are some of the biggest supporters of Valpo athletics and Valpo basketball. Introduce yourself next time you're at a game or Homecoming or a Board weekend, or send them a thoughtful note. Just ripping them without engaging in dialogue about the conflicting priorities of a University is not productive.
Let's try to paint the story a little more accurately. Administration and board failure to address university athletic facility needs began years before the current economic downturn. Over all those years, they never developed a comprehensive strategic master plan for athletic facility upgrades. Whatever improvements that have been made in the past 20 years have been piecemeal add-ons to academic facility initiatives. I have been told that they approved the jump to the Horizon League without ever having developed an assessment of current and future athletic facility needs to be competitive in a higher profile conference. In other words, a true cost/benefit analysis was never developed - only a superficial study that compared travel costs, etc.
So here we sit with what is now the worst bb facility in the HL, an inter collegate track program with no track, no fieldhouse, etc., etc. And you think the administration and board have a firm grasp on all this? As to basketball they can thank their lucky stars that a family named Drew has SO FAR given them cover for their failure to do their job. The day Bryce Drew leaves and we hire some young coach without a name or some elses retread, our basketball program is headed straight to the crapper. Lastly, as to the "we have more needs than money" pity party, it reminds me of someone who buys a much bigger home than they ever should have and then cries that they don't have any money to furnish it or keep it up. No one forced Valparaiso University to participate in D-1 athletics. Like anything in life you have to pay to play. From the beginning of our entry into D-1 athletics to today the leadership of Valparaiso University has never demonstrated BY ITS ACTIONS that it understands that.
Luckily, I don't believe Bryce will leave the university anytime in the future, as he has already made his money playing basketball. Unless we show no backing for him, I don't see him leaving.
In regards to athletics backing, President Heckler seemed to indicate in his meeting down here a few months back that athletics is supported by the board, and they realize the draw a D-1 school has over other universities without similar sports. Just the added exposure of being on ESPN every now and then gets our school name in the mainstream. So many people know of Valpo down here because of our basketball team, that it draws applicants who wouldn't otherwise look into such a school.
When I donate money to VU each year, I only donate it to the athletics programs (mainly baseball). If athletics ever went away, I would no longer donate...
Gonna shift gears here slightly, but Munster's very own Joe Crisman is proving to be quite the player for Loyola. He is absolutely a stud and would have been a very good addition to the Crusaders. Think Matt Kenney with just a bit more size. Munster players are very fundamentally sound coming out of high school. There is a very good point guard over there now that is a junior, which we probably will not recruit with Davidson locked up, but keep an eye on him (Schlottman).
lowposter
Quote from: lowposter on November 27, 2011, 05:30:55 PM
Gonna shift gears here slightly, but Munster's very own Joe Crisman is proving to be quite the player for Loyola. He is absolutely a stud and would have been a very good addition to the Crusaders. Think Matt Kenney with just a bit more size. Munster players are very fundamentally sound coming out of high school. There is a very good point guard over there now that is a junior, which we probably will not recruit with Davidson locked up, but keep an eye on him (Schlottman).
lowposter
He must be super-special then!
First off, it was former VU President O.P. Kretzman that said that a great university must be recognized nationally in one major sport. This, if my memory is correct, is what started Valpo's move to Division 1.
Priorities: I could support SOME renovation to the ARC that makes sense. Chairback seating on both sides with the addition of permanent seating on the east end. There is no legitimate business reason for a new stadium or significantly expanding the seating in the ARC. Valpo had a darn good team last year and there were empty seats for the Butler and Missouri State games. Build it and they will come is not a business strategy...it is a plan for financial failure. Additionally, if you were running the university would you honestly spend significant dollars on a new basketball facility over what has been spent for a new engineering wing, a new classroom building, a library that is competitive with any university, a union, etc. etc.? And do you think that there are not still pressiing priorities for new dorms that are greater than an athletic facility? I do believe they need to plan for overhauling student athletic facilities and with that could create more quality space for the basketball team and other programs...isn't that in the plan?
I have not been to half of the facilities in the Horizon league for basketball, but I would argue confidently that the ARC is better than the old Mecca where UW-Milwaukee plays. Bigger is not better. And while I would consider Hinkle a historic gem, you cannot honestly tell me that the ARC is not cleaner and more comfortable for watching a game. Heck, I go to games at Allen Fieldhouse now and (like Hinkle) it is a historic gem, but their seating makes the ARC look plush. Environment is far more important than money spent on facilities in my opinion and the ARC is still somewhat flat (a very poor schedule for fans and students this year does not help).
The last poster talks about targeting donations. This is great advice! If you want money spent on athletics, target your money there. Yeah, I know the university can adjust the Valpo fund to counteract that, but it does send a message.
Quote from: vu84v2 on November 28, 2011, 12:40:00 AMThe last poster talks about targeting donations. This is great advice! If you want money spent on athletics, target your money there. Yeah, I know the university can adjust the Valpo fund to counteract that, but it does send a message.
Some of the athletics coaches could do some more individual work on fundraising too. They can't all expect/hope Mark LaBarbera will bring in all the money for them. I mean has anyone received any "cries for help" in fundraising from the tennis or track coaching staff since the FITT project was started? I didn't receive anything from Ryan Moore or Mike Straubel about helping with the track team getting funds for the track, as an alum of both track and cross country at VU.
I definitely haven't seen anything related to FITT. I only get mail from the basketball and baseball programs.
I was an athlete on a team in the 80s (far from anything major and I was not very good). That program has sent me specific mailings asking for targeted donations - so it is at least done inconsistently from the athletic department.
Quote from: vu84v2 on November 28, 2011, 03:52:11 PM
I was an athlete on a team in the 80s (far from anything major and I was not very good). That program has sent me specific mailings asking for targeted donations - so it is at least done inconsistently from the athletic department.
What team were you a part of?
In tune with wh, Valpotx and historyman.
INVESTMENT: putting money or other items of value into something with an an expectation gain or favorable future returns.
All I'm looking for is more than lip service to "investing in our student athletes." Investment means two things to me: (1) priming the pump with a solid cash investment in visible assets and (2) bootstrapping on it with a professionally promoted and managed capital improvement fund drive to parallel and enhance the initial investment. In this manner the university can say, "Look, see we've dumped good money into this 'important' aspect of campus life and to finish the job we need $X,XXX,XX.00 more to finish the job. Come to think of that, I still don't know how much the FITT campaign generated and why the track still isn't a reality, while the softball complex has had a renovation in the meantime (not picking on SB -- that's really great that that's been done). Speaking only for myself, if I saw more of a commitment by the administration to truly supporting D-I athletics across the board, I'd be more willing to donate more money annually and more willing to underwrite a capital fund raising program.
So LUC, a private institution just like dear ol' Valpo, has revamped their athletic facility for their flagship athletic program (basketball) twice in the last 15 years, and yet here some of us are justifying the lack of movement by the folks in charge on VU's facility over the same time period. But hey, at least we can chest-thump about new video boards that have replaced scoreboards that were installed during the Reagan administration. That's a start. Maybe we'll get a revised or new venue for our flagship sport by 2050.
Please, don't piss down my back and tell me its raining.
Capital contributions for new campus buildings and related items from prior campaign – $240,000,000.00 or so?
Capital contributions for a new arena or for significant ARC venue improvements from that campaign - $0.00
Oh, and the campaign had about a $30M surplus, right?
On this issue, that is all I need to know.
Don't know where the idea has come up that VU ended up with a $30 million surplus from the last capital campaign. We may have ended up with $30 million over the announced goal, but that in no way represents a surplus, especially in light of the decline in endowment value experienced by nearly every four-year school since 2008.
President Harre, when he took over in 1988, was faced with an outdated library, a hideous student union, and a near-complete lack of music/art facilities. He and the board decided, and rightfully so, that these projects trumped all other building projects/improvements. The board was right then and they are right now. Perhaps a new fieldhouse will be part of the new campus master plan, details of which should be forthcoming in the next several months (and perhaps President Heckler will provide us with a glimpse of these plans on Dec 6th during his WVUR interview). Unless and until a major donor steps forward with a huge check, though, we are going to have to live with the ARC. And, given our need for new dorms, another new academic building, a larger endowment, and new science and nursing facilities, that is the way it should be. Paul
A fieldhouse was mentioned by Heckler when he was in TX, so hopefully that does happen!
In regards to campus improvements, I definitely approve of what has been going on around campus. As long as after these much needed improvements are made we focus on some of the athletics shortfalls more, I will be happy. I liked the baseball renovations performed while I was playing (clubhouse, better playing surface, etc) and since that time, as well as improvements for the other sports (softball, tennis, football, etc). We can only commit so many resources to sports, and basketball has received improvements in practice courts, digital signage, and a few other things. I am sure that a more intimate gameday environment will be in the plans, just a matter of when.
Let me tell you all a story. Please read to the end. I DO have a message.
It was 1962. I got off the NY-Chicago train in the Indiana town of Valparaiso from NY with a trunk, a suitcase and a 1/2 grant-in-aid for FB. I had applied and enrolled sight unseen -- heck, I was good old Luderan boy. As I was riding in the cab to Wehrenberg Hall on Laporte Ave the driver pointed out Brown Field - 'our college's FB field' - on my right. I can't tell you how disappointed I was. I had captained an undefeated HS team and played in front of large crowds and now I was going to play COLLEGE FB ----- here? This was the era of limited substitution FB and frosh ineligible. I wound up starting as a sophomore as a G/LB on a Dave Lass QBed team that beat the likes of Indiana State, and, later in 1969, that same program won the Indiana Collegiate Conference FB title. I also threw the javelin for probably the greatest track team in VU history under Darrell Zimmerman, where we had to time our track meet events to ensure that a miler wasn't clocked by a line drive during a baseball game, because the loose cinder track ran through right field. I came to love my experiences at Valpo despite, even then, lesser facilities. Great memories. And that's why I'm posting BTW.
So what's my message. That VU can still be great despite inferior facilities? Nope.
The message is that 45 years ago we had a pretty subpar grandstand and we had a crappy track and ...... you know what? the view from Laporte Ave hasn't appreciably changed! I stand corrected -- there's no track.
So we are upset that someone has donated $15 million to a project that has major meaning to them but didn't give to athletics....that makes loads of sense. Valpotx just said he does the same thing giving only to athletics (as others here probably do) and wouldn't give if they dropped sports (while I disagree with this attitude but it is his money to do with what he pleases), on a smaller level I assume...should the good folks in another department be upset? He is right, VU can only commit so much to sports. VU is not a sports first school, obviously. You want to see a new building send in that multi-million dollar donation. If you have the means, then step up and do something about it.
The tennis and football field were given improvements from that $240million campaign.
Also, UIC was probably able to accomplish the building of this facility in a recession because they have an enrollment nearly 6 times that of Valpo's.
Quote from: valpo84 on November 26, 2011, 08:23:35 PM
It is unfortunate that we don't have unlimited assets and endowment that can make a couple posters happy. We are a private university with a limited endowment. We had faciliteis and still do that are under competitive in major areas like residences, the Union classrooms, not just one of the newest buildings on campus the ARC. The Chapel was in bad need of repairs after over 50 years. It is the center of campus physically and mission-wise. The ARC itself is below today's standards for space utilization and revenue maximization. Everyone, that includes, the Board knows this, but unless you all who are so critical forgot we have been in a rescession for 3 years, and we have limited funds (and your willing to step up with $15 million), you just can't make $100 or $50 million available for a revamp immediately to meet the criticisms. The University recognizes it needs to revamp the main athletic facilities, including building a facility that meets the needs of most of the student body. There are studies to find the best solutions and the end result will be announced when it's time. You have read on this board the progress of that. Frankly, there are many on that Board who are some of the biggest supporters of Valpo athletics and Valpo basketball. Introduce yourself next time you're at a game or Homecoming or a Board weekend, or send them a thoughtful note. Just ripping them without engaging in dialogue about the conflicting priorities of a University is not productive.
Don't give me the recession excuse. We built a brand new engineering building recently. That was not cheap.
DM you don't know what you are talking about here. That money was also raised by one very wealthy alum.
Quote from: sectionee on November 28, 2011, 07:53:32 PM
DM you don't know what you are talking about here. That money was also raised by one very wealthy alum.
sectionee hit it on the head. Just flapping your lips without knowledge of the facts in nonproductive to say the least. Don Fites put up the money for the Engineering addition. He is a board member and former chairman of Catepillar. When a fund drive is put in place people are asked what project they want to dedicate their contribution toward. BTW, their was no "excess" money raised that was not earmarked for a given purpose. In many cases those funds were given toward the endowment, which guarantees the future of the institution.
So. we can all look at high school facilities and I have one here not far from me at Eden Prairie High, who just won the big school state championship here in Minnesota. Guess what? They didn't raise funds for those facilities with donations. It was done on the back of the tax payers.
I contribute what I can and specify either basketball or the Valpo Fund. I may shift a little toward football as I think they are on the right track. Give money toward a track. If I had more I'd send some in for that purpose
Quote from: valporun on November 28, 2011, 04:19:11 PM
Quote from: vu84v2 on November 28, 2011, 03:52:11 PM
I was an athlete on a team in the 80s (far from anything major and I was not very good). That program has sent me specific mailings asking for targeted donations - so it is at least done inconsistently from the athletic department.
What team were you a part of?
I played golf. Dick Fick was the coach.
I live in the northeast. What I see here from multiple schools (both private and public) is focusing their alumni involvement. Science building? -- develop a program, target the donors and raise the $$; new library? -- develop a program. Move to D-I ? -- build a stadium; etc. etc.
Having been clueless for 40 some years about VU athletic fund raising (except for the periodic V-Club requests for help and the FITT thing a ways back), I ask this question: When have the resources of athletic alumni (600 out of 3800 each year? -- probably more than graduate annually with a degree in biology) been truly harnessed and focused on upgrading VU to D-I facility-wise? All of our posts are good in that it raises our BP levels. But the next step is necessary -- that raised attitude is needed to drive people together to raise the funds.
But it appears that there is no one trying to harness this apparently large well of potential energy. Is there anyone in the athletic department truly qualified to inventory and coordinate this energy and focus it in the direction I am hearing all of us want it to go?
Here's what I'd like to see/hear: "VU Alums! We are now a D-I University in all sports. We have to complete the track around Brown Field and renovate the stands, adding 2000 seats, expanding the press box, and enclosing the field with a 6' berm and a steel/brick fence. It will cost $x. This will make the football, men's and women's soccer and the men's and women's track and field programs D-I competitive. The total cost is $W and the university has invested $X to initiate this effort. Ground is being broken in Y months. But to finish this we need your help to pay for the rest of it and that will be $Z."
Similarly -- "In addition to the new scoreboard, the ARC needs upgrading. We are installing really cool reserved seating and .... whatever (sorry, I don't know much about this). It will cost $X. The construction begins in Y months and to complete this we need $Z from you to help to pay for it."
Truthfully, as an alumni of 45 years I have never been confronted with these kinds of challenges -- but I would welcome them. Why? Because I'd know exactly where my $ is going and I would be able to follow the fund raising progress. FITT did not do it (for me at least).
I have great personal memories about my four years at Valpo. But from 900 miles away, I have very few things that I can point to with PRIDE about my university (except, maybe, for Bryce's shot in the NCAA tourney) that I can share with people who didn't go to VU. Right now all my friends here see are occasional BB wins on ESPN and a lot of lopsided losses (29 straight) in FB and BB (AU, OSU). i'd like to find a way to participate in programs to change that. Maybe I'm just not on the right mailing lists and I certainly don't see much mention of this type of thing in the alumni glossy publications.
Quote from: vu84v2 on November 28, 2011, 12:40:00 AM
I have not been to half of the facilities in the Horizon league for basketball, but I would argue confidently that the ARC is better than the old Mecca where UW-Milwaukee plays. Bigger is not better.
Currently UWM has instituted a student fee ($20) that UWM has been collecting for over a year to help pay for a new on campus facility that would seat roughly what the ARC seats (5,000). Then if they can attract an opponent that would draw over 5,000 they could move the game to the U.S. Cellular Arena where they play their games now. At least they have a plan in place.
Quote from: valpotx on November 28, 2011, 05:57:22 PM
A fieldhouse was mentioned by Heckler when he was in TX, so hopefully that does happen!
These things are "mentioned" constantly but nothing concrete gets done such as they are doing at Milwaukee and has been put in place as far as a revamped Gentile Center at Loyola.
Quote from: sectionee on November 28, 2011, 07:41:19 PM
Also, UIC was probably able to accomplish the building of this facility in a recession because they have an enrollment nearly 6 times that of Valpo's.
It wasn't UIC it was Loyola that revamped the Gentile Center. Loyola's enrollment is 9,077 as of fall 2011 certainly not 6 times Valpo's enrollment. Butler is the only school in the conference that has comparable enrollment to Valpo.
Loyola also has an endowment that is over twice that of Valpo. I believe they have the highest in the HL?
Quote from: valpotx on November 29, 2011, 01:10:45 AM
Loyola also has an endowment that is over twice that of Valpo. I believe they have the highest in the HL?
Yes, and they could have spent the money that was spent on the revamped Gentile Center on dorms, a new chapel, new academic buildings, parking structures, etc. I don't see why their endowment size is relevant to the decision to put their money into athletic facilities.
It is relevant as I imagine that means they have more money to spend on such things. I believe someone said the renovations cost $100 million? If you have double the money of another school, it is a little easier to make such additions. I haven't been on Loyola's campus, but what do their academic buildings and dorms look like condition-wise?
Quote from: valpotx on November 29, 2011, 02:12:13 AM
It is relevant as I imagine that means they have more money to spend on such things. I believe someone said the renovations cost $100 million? If you have double the money of another school, it is a little easier to make such additions. I haven't been on Loyola's campus, but what do their academic buildings and dorms look like condition-wise?
Here is a statement from the president of Loyola University Chicago that specifically mentions the Loyola basketball team. It is from August of 2011.
It was ten years ago that Michael J. Garanzini, S.J., became the president of this institution.
In that time an extraordinary amount of progress has taken place. It's more than buildings going
up and coming down, although campus improvements are a major part of the University's
evolution. It's also increased enrollments, expanded programming, and more.
On the occasion of this anniversary, we celebrate all that has been accomplished
in the past decade, not only on the part of Father Garanzini, whose leadership has certainly
guided the University well, but in gratitude to everyone who has worked so hard to create the
best possible environment for learning, growth, and service to others.
Loyola magazine asked Father Garanzini to reflect on his tenure—and to look ahead.
The University's greatest accomplishments:
• I think the first hurdle was putting Loyola on a financial model that allowed for sufficient margin with opportunity to invest in the future. We put about $600 million into infrastructure: that's taking care of old plant, renovating plant, and then building new plant. Getting that model in place was crucial.
• Loyola had the opportunity to seize the wave of Chicago's own economic growth over the past ten years. We've been able to take advantage of the city's marvelous transformation by being ourselves a player in that transformation.
• We're much more conscious of our mission and identity as a Jesuit, Catholic, urban, research institution. We're much more deliberate in stating and living up to that specific identity.
• We've been able to plan for the future, with regard to the medical center, in a very difficult and changing health science and medical environment.
• We've grown from a local to an international, worldwide institution. Our presence in Vietnam and Beijing, establishing a permanent home for the Rome Center, and working with the Jesuit universities in Peru and Indonesia are just examples of the kind of international perspective we've gained in the past decade.
Hopes for the next ten years:
• I'd like us to become a model of sustainability and
innovation in education.
• I'd like us to become an even more student-centered institution that recognizes the curricular and cocurricular opportunities and the necessity for a very deliberate student plan. I want the value we impart to our students to be apparent and demonstrable.
• We have to keep securing financial resources for students of modest means, especially first-generation students. This is a vital part of our mission.
• We need to continue gaining a reputation for our stellar programs. This includes health research and medicine, law, business, and the Centers of Excellence. It also includes our basketball program. I think we have the right team in place to do all of this. Our vice presidents, deans, and directors are on board, prepared, and enthusiastic. Loyola's in a great place to accomplish as much or more in the next ten years as we have in the past. It's a wonderful time to be here.I wonder if you would ever see the mention of the basketball team in a statement of hopes by a university president at Valpo.
It took some digging and here is the info on "Reimagine" Loyola-Chicago's 5 year project that the Gentile Center renovation was a part of.
http://www.luc.edu/reimagine/aboutreimagine/ (http://www.luc.edu/reimagine/aboutreimagine/)
You can click on each phase to see what it entails. The projects of the "Reimagine" building program are running from January 2010 to 2015.
1. The Father's first bullet points could easily be used to describe Valpo's past 10 years and more, just substitute Lutheran for Jesuit.
2. Do you really want a college president to single out one program? Generally, schools that have set an academic institution's main goals as athletics and a specific program, have had some notable implosions of infractions. Loyola's hoops program used to compete for national championships. It had a history which has dropped from its last decent days during the Alexander "the Great" Hughes days of the late 1980s. For Valpo, and Mark Heckler has stated that he believes in D1 sports and believes in the Horizon League, but it also has to do it the right way. Valpo's jump to the Horizon, let's not forget, was a statement of committment to D1 athletics, and higher level athletics. We have competed and are starting to win championships in this conference. We started two new D1 sports, women's and men's golf and women's bowling (already a nationally ranked team). That required foresight and funding.
3. We have had two major capital campaigns in the past decade. I'm guessing that we will see another one in the near future. I personally hope the ARC renovations are embodied in the campaign, but as part of an overall program to help as many student-athletes and the student body as possible. We need desperately a fieldhouse with intramural courts, weight room, fitness center, etc.
4. President Heckler has answered questions on this:
"HECKLER: We have some significant work ahead. We need to continue to improve our support facilities for women's teams. We have to determine the best long term strategy to enhance our vibrant and competitive basketball programs, and to do that in a away that will attract accomplished scholar-athletes to Valpo.
We need to honor the commitment we have made to provide a track for our track team and others who want to engage in competitive running. And we need a visionary plan for athletics and the facilities that will support our teams and build valpo's prominence and distiction as the finest Lutheran university in the world."
You can watch and hear this interview at, click on "Athletics":
http://www.valpo.edu/valpomag/assets/video.php?headline=Q%20and%20A%20with%20President%20Mark%20A.%20Heckler&video=hecklerQA (http://www.valpo.edu/valpomag/assets/video.php?headline=Q%20and%20A%20with%20President%20Mark%20A.%20Heckler&video=hecklerQA)
Every time I have heard him speak he mentions how important athletics are to Valpo's image. With that, he has also stated that investing further into athletics is something he wants to do.
84 mentioned that a new fitness center should be part of a new campaign. Don't we have a new fitness center that was completed a couple of years ago? Is that inadequate too??
72, I think 84 is talking a new fitness center that is more of a fieldhouse? The fieldhouse would have intramural basketball and tennis courts, an indoor track facility for running/walking purposes, weight and cardio rooms, all the things you can find at other private schools of Valpo's size, enrollment, endowment levels. The new fitness center might be currently adequate, but it is missing those options for other activities to happen without having to put on a jacket and warm clothing in the winter months to quickly run over to the ARC to shoot some baskets, swim some laps, play some racquetball, or anything like that.
Quote from: VULB#62 on November 28, 2011, 11:28:16 PM
I live in the northeast. What I see here from multiple schools (both private and public) is focusing their alumni involvement. Science building? -- develop a program, target the donors and raise the $$; new library? -- develop a program. Move to D-I ? -- build a stadium; etc. etc.
Having been clueless for 40 some years about VU athletic fund raising (except for the periodic V-Club requests for help and the FITT thing a ways back), I ask this question: When have the resources of athletic alumni (600 out of 3800 each year? -- probably more than graduate annually with a degree in biology) been truly harnessed and focused on upgrading VU to D-I facility-wise? All of our posts are good in that it raises our BP levels. But the next step is necessary -- that raised attitude is needed to drive people together to raise the funds.
But it appears that there is no one trying to harness this apparently large well of potential energy. Is there anyone in the athletic department truly qualified to inventory and coordinate this energy and focus it in the direction I am hearing all of us want it to go?
Here's what I'd like to see/hear: "VU Alums! We are now a D-I University in all sports. We have to complete the track around Brown Field and renovate the stands, adding 2000 seats, expanding the press box, and enclosing the field with a 6' berm and a steel/brick fence. It will cost $x. This will make the football, men's and women's soccer and the men's and women's track and field programs D-I competitive. The total cost is $W and the university has invested $X to initiate this effort. Ground is being broken in Y months. But to finish this we need your help to pay for the rest of it and that will be $Z."
Similarly -- "In addition to the new scoreboard, the ARC needs upgrading. We are installing really cool reserved seating and .... whatever (sorry, I don't know much about this). It will cost $X. The construction begins in Y months and to complete this we need $Z from you to help to pay for it."
Truthfully, as an alumni of 45 years I have never been confronted with these kinds of challenges -- but I would welcome them. Why? Because I'd know exactly where my $ is going and I would be able to follow the fund raising progress. FITT did not do it (for me at least).
I have great personal memories about my four years at Valpo. But from 900 miles away, I have very few things that I can point to with PRIDE about my university (except, maybe, for Bryce's shot in the NCAA tourney) that I can share with people who didn't go to VU. Right now all my friends here see are occasional BB wins on ESPN and a lot of lopsided losses (29 straight) in FB and BB (AU, OSU). i'd like to find a way to participate in programs to change that. Maybe I'm just not on the right mailing lists and I certainly don't see much mention of this type of thing in the alumni glossy publications.
Is that you Harry? We've never met but based on your time at valpo and your position I'm wondering whether or not you are part of a family that had three brothers play football.
As for your highlighted sentence, were you references just athletics or the Universities reputation in general. There are many accomplishments for its students( a Business School team winning a national SAP competition for marketing against schools from all over the country including the Ivy League) and facilities in several areas that put us in an extremely elite area (Meteorology, Engineering). Clearly we are the only Lutheran institution with a national image--students from every state and more than 50 foreign countries. (I know because I speak with potential students and parents on a regular basis), with new facilities that will keep us competitive.
As stated earlier, I agree with all the suggested changes to athletic facilities, just reacting to your general comment. Check out the Valpo site on a regular basis and you'll see lots of things to be proud of! Now, if you are Harry, then you were one heck of a linebacker and a fraternity brother!
Quote from: 78crusader on November 28, 2011, 05:34:31 PM
Don't know where the idea has come up that VU ended up with a $30 million surplus from the last capital campaign. We may have ended up with $30 million over the announced goal, but that in no way represents a surplus, especially in light of the decline in endowment value experienced by nearly every four-year school since 2008.
78Crusader you are right--my use of the term surplus was inaccurate. A better way to have stated it would have been that VU had surpassed its fundraising goal by about $30M during the last major campaign.
That notwithstanding, let me revise my original post so we can take a better look at the level of commitment by the University for its flagship sport:
Capital contributions for new campus buildings and related items from prior campaigns that concluded from 2002 to 2008: $360,000,000.00
Capital contributions for a new arena or for significant ARC venue improvements from those campaigns - $0.00
Division I level thinking? Only at Valpo.
Campaign goal or not, trust me on this, no one is holding donor's feet to the fire and saying "forget about sports, you can ONLY give money for the union" If a major donor wanted to give say, $15 million to redo Brown Field or the ARC, there would no one standing there saying "sorry, that's just not high on our agenda now" "How about a new science building??"
I have the feeling the next capital campaign -- which is poised to begin, I think, in 2012 -- will be sort of a good news/bad news deal. Let me break my own rule and engage in a bit of speculation: The good news -- VU will announce its intention to build a fieldhouse on the hospital site, along with plans for a new track around Brown Field. The bad news -- the fieldhouse is probably years away from becoming a reality, and fundraising has yet to begin for the new track.
There are just too many other projects that need doing. First up is a new dorm. Second is a new science building (the cost of which will probably equal or even exceed the cost of the new union). Third up is the renovation of Meier Hall, for the Department of Education. Those three deals will take up most, if not all, of the money that the next capital campaign allocates to building projects.
Hope I'm wrong and that there is an athletics project in the near term instead of the long run.
Paul
One of the differences between Alan Harre and Mark Heckler is the approach to fund raising and funding for individual projects. For example, Alan would have never started the new home for Arts and Sciences until funding, including endowment was complete. Heckler said, "we need it now, not in 5 years" (not an actual quote but just my interpretation)
In the same way the new dorm you mention will not be funded with University resources but rather via outside investment and a long term lease from the University. So, if you take the cost of the new dorm off the list you may very well have the dough to get some things done over at athletics.
Heckler is an innovator and sees thing differently than the typical "funding first" approach. Hopefully the Board will agree, but from the President's office there is certainly hope.
President Heckler is doing a student led interview over on WVUR, I think, on or about December 5. Check their site for details. Hopefully there will be a substantive discussion about the future building projects.
In reviewing campaign giving, keep in mind that the total includes deferred gifts, the largest chunk of which may be estate plans, so the announced total may be significantly higher than the cash that is available in the near term. You could borrow against that "promise," but some institutions that have done so discovered that the loan payments were a major drain on operations (sacrificing expenditures on things such as equipment, faculty, etc) while waiting for the golden egg.