As I understand or perceive it, the major weaknesses right now are athletic fundrasing, attendance, and winning (excepting the men's volleyball team, of course). The deparment has made a lot of moves that have been expensive: moving to the MVC, coaching changes, new facilities, etc. Yet the increase in revenues has not been there. Fundraising is lagging, from what I hear. Attendance is way below what anyone would project. The buyout or termination costs for a number of coaches in the past several years have been expensive. Many of the facilities upgrades were likely paid through a different account (capital and facilities), but the maintenance and operation costs are much higher. In short, the higher-ups and accountants must be getting some sticker shock at the increasing deficits from athletics.

I'm pretty certain that when many of these moves were made, there was the promise that revenues would increase along with the changes, but very little has been done to make sure those projections came through. Attendance and fundraising seem to be almost an afterthought, done in the same way (or worse) than they've been done for a couple of decades. Frankly, a lot of the core fans the department relied on in the past are aging, dying, or not showing up. I think ticket prices were raised too high, too fast. Marketing has lagged because there's little investment in it (no radio for men's basektball? really?), and I think the division is cripplingly understaffed. Last year's lackluster home non-con schedule didn't help much.

The athletic department certainly has a lot of things going for it-- men's volleyball national championship, a big name like Sheryl Swoopes as women's basketball coach, joining the MVC, better facilities than in years past, some great individual performances, exciting athletes (many of whom are from the area), and some sports where growth/winning should be expected very soon. From the administration viewpoint, the large deficits have to be covered through revenue and fundraising. From the fan point of view, the attendance issues (ticket costs, gameday atmosphere, customer service, etc.) and marketing has to improve.

It's going to take a hard to find skill set to get those areas on track, so I'd rather have more time spent to find the right person.

I didn't realize a buyout would be a problem. I know Loyola has money around and I think you guys can make progress. I'm not sure how much progress can me made with Moser and if he continues to lose, a new AD typically doesn't wait long. But there's more going on than I'm ever going to know at your school.

I have no idea what he's getting paid or what it would cost to terminate him, but I don't think going a different direction is necessarily a reboot as someone said. If you can hold onto talent that is already at Loyola, I think a better coach could build off of what is there. I've always said Moser can recruit but he has yet to show me that he can really coach. He struggled at ISU and seems to be struggling at Loyola. I want you guys to get over the hump. I think future success of the MVC depends on the non-football schools doing what they can as football is going to continue to drain resources. Especially with the new rules coming about paying players/cost of attendence/other benefits that the MVC will and should adopt to keep up as well as possible with the top of the basketball world.

SIU ran their proud program into the ground because they couldn't afford to fire Lowery. I'd hate to see Moser hang around not being productive, if that's what happens, because you can't financially afford to get rid of him. And with so many new guys, especially in the frontcourt this year, it could be another rough one. There's some good talent, but new faces often times take time to help take that next step. I worry that it's going to be a rough year in Chicago.

I know you guys are and should be more optimistic about your team than I am right now, but that much turn over creates questions about the upcoming season for me. I know we have 6 new faces as well, but return a lot of talent as well from a team that was very successful. I think your young guys looked better late in the year, but there's still a lot of questions outside of Doyle and the undersized PF whose name escapes me at the moment. At least from the outside looking in.

_________________
The Roundhouse

I think we have the money, Sub, especially if we get an AD who gets fundraising, marketing, and attendance on track. Right now the graph lines in those areas are headed south, and reversing the trends would make it easier to pull the trigger on a new coach. I also agree that getting a new coach wouldn't necessarily require a total reboot-- Jankovich took over from Moser's 15-16 team at ISU in 2007 and went 25-10.

I wonder how the big Wednesday meeting GoRamblers mentioned earlier in this thread went.


I hope Ramblermania had spies at the meeting and we get a report soon!

( A PM would work for me too)

Larry had a year left.
Loyola didn't need to buy Grace out.

At the rate we pay an AD getting one with those skill sets is not likely.
Given the aptitude of the search committee I would say its a real long shot.

Sub-
Loyola has a very big endowment but give our past history its not likely any part of it will be used for athletics after the recent outlays.

Should have thought about this earlier, but I hope someone at the golf outing updates us with any information that is shared there.

_________________
Cigarboy sucks!

No news broken. The info shared here is accurate. Finalists will be on campus soon.

FWIW, Susan Malisch did a nice job hosting the event. Quite personable.

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

Did you not play with Matt Gordon? How were you not able to get any scheduling information? Come on, ahunte!

_________________
Cigarboy sucks!

I did, and I actually didn't even ask about the schedule.

I'll be turning in my Ramblermaniac card by noon today.

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart