Messages

The institution's financial/strategic support for the program is one obvious question mark. But I really am starting to wonder if other factors existed that have created a push out the door in addition to the pull of Vandy's bigger program and $.

I hope this gets some serious reporting. I'm not ready to move onto the next chapter. An autopsy is in order first.

Interesting article out of San Diego about the benefits of the NIT, including financial, compared to NCAA. Excerpts:

-"It's not a big windfall," SDSU athletic director Jim Sterk said, "but you get all the other positives. It engages people at a higher level and for a longer period of time than we've been able to do in a while. It's really positive from that standpoint. There are only eight collegiate teams left playing basketball (in the NCAA or NIT) by next week, so that's pretty cool."

-You get 15 percent of the net gate from any home games in the opening three rounds.

-There are other revenues that the NCAA, which owns and operates the NIT, distributes to the participants based on how far you advance. You get one unit for making the field, two for reaching the second round, three for the quarterfinals; SDSU and the other semifinalists each get five units. The rub: Each unit is worth a mere $5,220.


Full story: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/mar/26/sdsu-basketball-nit-ncaa-benefits/

We've heard so much about the double bind of, on the one hand, being told we need to schedule a stronger OOC schedule and, on the other, being turned down by 95% of those we call due to the perception of a low upside/high downside of playing strong mid-majors.

Is there anything preventing the Athletic Department from publishing a list of every school they contacted, along with dates and any details of proposals? At the very least, if would be cathartic (in a Giving the Finger kind of way) to have that info available. At most, it might sway some people who don't understand just how much the decks are stacked.

There would, of course, be some social downsides (schools might be wary of negotiating with a team who openly publicizes things). But is there anything actually barring this from happening? What if mid-majors banded together and all committed to doing this? If the system isn't going to be transparent, let's bring our own sunlight. If the system bends its own rules and traditions to perpetuate the closed party that is the Power 5, let's consider bending things ourselves.

Center (5): 3.5. Vashil is a game changer on defense. Cleaned the offensive glass better than last year. Not necessarily lost on offense, but I still hold my breath on every entry pass. Jubril has flashes of being a 25-minute contributor, but I question his decision making on offense.

The (4): 4. Alec's rebounding stood out as his biggest improvement over last year. Struggled in multiple games to get his offense going in the first half. Needs to learn to overcome double teams and the extra attention that comes with being a star. Great clutch-time performances on many occasions. Adequate defensive ability paired with above-average hustle.

The (3): 3.25. Shane put together a really good year after a year on the bench. His ability to drive really fills in a huge need. Never stood out on defense, but with his length and speed could be a force on both ends. Potential to be an all-league second teamer if he works at it and is given the minutes. Skara needs 10-15 more pounds of muscle to compensate for his scrappy, fearless play.

The (2): 3. The Walkers both lost some confidence after last season. Tevonn can play through rough shooting spells with his defense, and his ability to keep the offense flowing is evident whenever he's out. D Walker seemed to find his shot toward the end of the season, but he still takes two or three too many ill-advised shots per game. Let's hope they rediscover their moxie in the next 6 months.

The (1): 3.75. Keith was the most reliable player on the roster. Alec had higher peaks, but nobody can string together a full game like Keith. Showed great poise and leadership throughout the year. He really embraced the role Bryce gave him. You can tell players look to him to set the direction. Too bad we didn't get 4 full years with him. EVN struggled throughout the year: The point guard experiment that seemed to have some legs at the end of last year never really got off the ground this year.


My scale:
1: I trust them to lose their matchups at any given HL game.
2: I trust them to be on par with their matchups at any given HL game.
3: I trust them to win their matchups at any given HL game.
4: I trust them to be notably excellent on any given night.
5: I can't imagine them getting any better.

Here's a graph of people googling "valpo" or "valparaiso university" over time. Notice the big spikes every March: https://goo.gl/SnLZFw

Check out these page view statistics from Valpo's Wikipedia page: https://goo.gl/bFxbmM
They exploded on Jan 25, a Monday, the day polls come out. Presumably, the two are related. This year, people are taking notice well before March. Let's hope Valpo can capitalize on this increased (and free) national attention.

Speaking of which, if you haven't  yet, give Valpo a good rating on Google: https://goo.gl/yhYqGo
It might seem frivolous, but for many people, a quick google of "valpo" after seeing that name on a bracket will be their first encounter with the school. It would be great if the first thing they saw was a good rating with a solid number of reviewers. Early impressions matter!

NACUBO's annual endowment study is out.

Valpo:
2015: $204 million (0.8% increase)
2014: $202 million (14% increase)
2013: $177 million

(Values as of June 30 of each year)

http://www.nacubo.org/Documents/EndowmentFiles/2015_NCSE_Endowment_Market_Values.pdf
http://www.nacubo.org/Documents/EndowmentFiles/2014_Endowment_Market_Values_Revised2.27.15.pdf

Summary: Moody's Investors Service has revised Valparaiso's (Valpo) outlook to negative from stable. The revision of the outlook reflects the university's competitive student market, highlighted by declining net tuition revenue and a rising discount rate. The A2 rating incorporates the university's recognizable brand, moderate size and generally stable enrollment, along with moderate leverage, management's cost containment initiatives, and fundraising that should augment cash and investments. The rating additionally incorporates limited near-term revenue growth, high dependence on student charges and limited financial flexibility. The negative outlook reflects likely revenue declines and operating deficits resulting from modest to moderate declines in net tuition revenue and steeper discounting.

Full version: https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-revises-Valparaiso-Universitys-IN-outlook-to-negative-affirms-A2--PR_903029856


Not the best news, especially after years of retooling.

Lots of info about plans for walking, biking, and autos starting on page 134. Auto-specific stuff beings on 152. Guessing when all three phases are implemented everything will work more efficiently. In the meantime, some awkward growing pains.

http://issuu.com/smithgroupjjr/docs/valparaiso_university

Nine Fraternities, 376 members....about 25% of undergrads.

http://www.valpo.edu/greek/documents/2014-2015%20Annual%20Report.pdf

Not the same, but you can listen in via Oregon State's online streaming service: http://www.osubeavers.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?type=live&db_oem_id=30800

The video tour seems to be back up...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug1ZBeRpmeo

I've read through the strategic plan before. The five-year plan is what I was hoping to read. Intranet site is inaccessible to the public.

Does anyone have access to the presentation/letter? It would be easier to process everyone's thoughts if I could read the original in its entirety.

The Valpo YouTube channel just posted a great short tour of the new building: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54L4CYXIVF4

Obtaining a lower admittance rate might increase the perception of quality (in a vague sort of way) to the outside world, which is worth something. I think the solution should be framed as finding ways to entice students of high caliber to choose Valpo rather than to field more applications overall or to keep out those students who indicate they might not make it at Valpo (The average ACT of incoming freshmen at Valpo is comparable to other schools on the list, so I question how much the retention rate has to do with accepting too many unprepared students).

While the number of students Valpo admit is high relative to its peers, the number that catches my eye even more is the percentage of admitted students who choose Valpo--18%. It's actually on par with the schools we're competing with (and higher than Butler's), but it still seems low. It means that Valpo is not at the top of the list for 80% of people admitted. I'm assuming that a large chunk of those students are very good students who apply to a few quality colleges and end up deciding they can do better than Valpo. If Valpo can make itself the #1 school for more of the students they are already admitting, then they can gradually become more selective.

Also, great point by VU72 that you can slice schools so many ways. Great to be acknowledged for a variety of reasons by a variety of publications who try to take a stab at "ranking". The Washington Monthly poll acknowledges, in a way, that we are succeeding at what Valpo is trying to be--not just a source of education, but a source of "good" for the world. To that point, Valpo might be more willing to give a shot to a kid who might, on paper, seem like he or she couldn't make it. While it might create a little drag on metrics like 6-year graduation rates, I trust the success stories, which can't be measured as readily, are worth the cost.

(sidenote: the endowment for Valpo in 2011 was $163 million. Since January 2011, the S&P500 has risen 53%. If Valpo's endowment was put in a simple index fund, it would be worth $244 million today (less about $5 million in endowment income VU has used since then).)

Info found here:
http://colleges.startclass.com/l/1422/Valparaiso-University
http://nonprofits.findthecompany.com/l/499665/Lutheran-University-Association

Bleacher Report named Vashil the eleventh best defensive stopper in the country. Rankings like this are always to be taken lightly, but the inclusion of Vashil in a list of top defenders is certainly warranted and a little spotlight is good, too!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2546180-ranking-the-top-defensive-stoppers-in-college-basketball-in-2015-16/page/11

A somewhat related topic:  I just noticed that the Duesenberg Welcome Center is missing from Google Maps. (However, Beacon Hall, which I believe is a newer building, is on it). Does anyone know how to submit a request to add it to Google? I imagine more than a few visitors, including prospective students, use Google Maps to get to Valpo and that the first stop for many of them is the Welcome Center. Not cool if it doesn't exist on it!

Here's a great article about Valpo's campus from the Cresset: http://thecresset.org/2011/Easter/Buggeln_E2011.html

Some interesting tidbits to entice you to read the whole thing:

"As early as 1926 Valparaiso's administration had been considering the construction of a full Gothic campus (Figure 6). The coherence of this vision is impressive. A Gothic chapel would sit on the highest point of land. The rest of the campus would be filled in on a quadrangle model."

"By the later 1960s, it was apparent that the university had charged ahead with building without following Labatut's advice. In a 1965 letter to O. P., he registered his disappointment about recent campus additions, particularly regarding the placement of new buildings. He noted "so much wasted space for so few buildings.... buildings designed as if unsympathetic to each other, or designed by different architects at different times and without consideration for the quality of space between them..."

"At Valparaiso, as was the case with many postwar campuses, the rapid speed of building had left insufficient time for careful planning. Certainly one of the biggest reasons to discard the Gothic campus in favor of a modern one was financial."

"In the last two decades, Valparaiso University has been moving back toward Labatut's vision of a higher density, better landscaped campus. The Valparaiso University Center for the Arts, dedicated in 1995, marked the beginning of a new wave of building, one that is still in process."

I just wish that Valpo did more to preserve the past. Other than the Chapel there isn't one building that shows me a glimpse to Valpo past, once the Zig-Zag dorms are gone. As much as Heckler has done great things for the university, I feel he's destroying the past while paving the way for the future. The history of Valparaiso University is just as important as the future.

I understand and agree with the sentiment, but unfortunately, I think that the majority of the buildings that went up during the Alumni/Lank/Neils stretch of Valpo history are not worth saving. Sure, countless memories are tied to them, but you could put up a shack and college students would find ways to make great memories in it. The buildings from that area aren't holding up well, and they don't have any significant aesthetic or architectural value. I can't think of a building that is or will soon be razed that I wish was preserved (for reasons other than nostalgia).

Contrast those buildings coming down on that side of campus to Heritage Hall--a beautiful, timeless building that VU decided was worth the extra cash to breathe new life into instead of razing and replacing. Wish we had more like that, but we don't, in my opinion.


Let's hope that the buildings currently going up and that will go up in the near future are buildings that are built with a sense of timelessness, buildings that future VU leaders will deem worthy of keeping around in order to create and preserve a sense of physical history that any college should strive for.

A company called RFD is listed as the Laboratory Design Consultant. Hastings & Chivetta is listed as the architect.

http://www.rfd.com/about_us/new_projects

I did some deep Googling and found a Powerpoint presentation the Provost gave about the building in September 2014.

Key quotes:
• The planning that has been completed to date has
allowed us to identify the overall science facility needs at
Valpo
• The programming process has determined that Valpo
needs 155,000 sq ft of space for the natural sciences
• We are using a "CM at risk" approach to this project, as
opposed to a "design build" approach
• This alternative approach is warranted by the complexity
of the project
• The timeline is very aggressive


Here's the link to the full presentation. New building stuff starts on page 9:
http://www.valpo.edu/provost/files/2014/09/2014_09_18_Mark-Biermann-Faculty-Meeting-Presentation.pdf

This evening, WVUR has its biannual interview with President Heckler. It begins at 5pm central. http://thesource95.com/2015/05/03/president-heckler-spring-semester-interview.

I'm assuming it will also be available to listen to on demand soon after, as in previous semesters.

I found an online archive of digitized Valpo yearbooks from 1896-2005. Didn't see it posted anywhere else on the forum after a quick search, so I thought I'd share.

The university has a 10-year embargo on posting new yearbooks for privacy reasons. Nevertheless, it's a great resource. A little clunky to use, but it's all there: http://library.valpo.edu/archives/yearbooks/index.html

Great turnout! Hopefully this two-year trend continues...

2015: 2,414 donors raised more than $532,000

2014: 1,885 donors raised more than $280,000

Considering the houses in question are a pair, I'd guess Phi Psi and Sig Ep. Plus, the university has ideas for Mound Street: https://youtu.be/rtj7gNOr9Dw?t=99