Gopher / Tommie hoops

I won’t get too excited and I know everyone wants to crap on the coach, but the gophs now have 3 consecutive conference wins — including #15 last night and on the road against a decent Iowa squad earlier this week. I was able to see the Iowa game and kept expecting them to unravel but they hung tough even as the lead shrunk late. Be awful fun to see them keep this momentum.

St. Thomas is looking strong again in the Summit league as well, sitting in 2nd with a 6-1 conference record and a stronger overall record than #1 Omaha. They are a team worth watching and for now they still play in a gym that’s not much bigger than most high schools.

I personally think it’s ridiculous we can’t get a gopher-tommie game scheduled each year.

I’d love to see a Tommie / Gopher game each year. It would certainly drum up more local support for each team.

I’m pretty apathetic to the Gopher basketball team. They’ve been mediocre or bad for so long it’s hard to follow them. Once Tubby failed I think that set the tone for mediocrity. If he couldn’t turn the tide who can? I’m concerned with NIL that it gets worse.

Very true on the mediocrity, and it is odd that Iowa and Wisconsin are in the top 20 almost every year and the Gophers usually struggle to be in the top 10 of the Big 10.

Seems like Wisconsin and Iowa keep their talent in state. When is the last time a big time recruit stayed here? Maybe Kris Humphrey?

I can’t disagree. I’m an alum so I will always care at least a little, and if they’re on tv and the score is at least competitive I’ll watch. They’re definitely at a point where winning a few big ten games in a row is remarkable—- which obviously isn’t a good sign.

The gopher/tommie hockey games have been fun. I think MN knows they have more to lose than gain by playing UST in basketball right now.

Matt Moen wrote:

Seems like Wisconsin and Iowa keep their talent in state. When is the last time a big time recruit stayed here? Maybe Kris Humphrey?

Not sure you’re right on this. Wisconsin can’t keep a good instate BB recruit from running away. The Badgers are good at getting Minnesota recruits though.
We’ve been loosing good football recruits since Fickel came to town also.

mxskeeter wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Matt Moen wrote:</div>
Seems like Wisconsin and Iowa keep their talent in state. When is the last time a big time recruit stayed here? Maybe Kris Humphrey?

Not sure you’re right on this. Wisconsin can’t keep a good instate BB recruit from running away. The Badgers are good at getting Minnesota recruits though.
We’ve been loosing good football recruits since Fickel came to town also.

I do know Wisconsin does a great job of recruiting Minnesota.

I think the prevailing knowledge is you have to recruit within 500 miles really well. The gophers haven’t.

If you look at the top 5 WI High school recruits from each of the last 5 years……only 4/25 ever played for UW.

The Badgers do a phenomenal job at keeping the 500 mile radius 2 star guys home and developing them. The top notch talent bails for the big time programs though.

The Gophers have long had a completely different philosophy to recruiting and filling their roster. Remember all the money greasy Pitino overspent on recruiting to accomplish nothing in the Big 10?

Wisconsin loses a lot of the top talent to the Blue Blood schools but they do a great job recruiting in MN and especially Lakeville.

Kinda shocked on the Gophers past couple of wins. They need to keep winning to not be in the bottom 3 of the Big Ten. Didnt know this till yesterday but the bottom 3 teams will not make the Big Ten Tournament.

Matt Moen wrote:

When is the last time a big time recruit stayed here? Maybe Kris Humphrey?

Pitino had some, Amir Coffey and Daniel Otoru off the top of my head.

I really like Ben Johnson, and think he might have a chance to be a good coach if given enough time and better support ($). His teams all get better throughout the year. And he’s a good recruiter too, he just loses guys to bigger programs and assumably more NIL $.

St Thomas’ gym was tiny in the MIAC 20 years ago, but I would also love to see Tommie-Gopher matchups yearly in most sports. The U just has nothing to gain, so I doubt it happens. Overall, until/unless the U gets it’s NIL $ on a competitive level, they won’t be doing anything of note in Football or Basketball. These kids are getting life changing money now, so I can’t really blame them for going where it’s greenest. But the U is always a decade behind and in a pro sports town, so until 3M, Cargill or UFG decide they want a premier college sports team, I don’t see it happening, and who the coach is won’t really matter.

Matt Moen wrote:

Seems like Wisconsin and Iowa keep their talent in state. When is the last time a big time recruit stayed here? Maybe Kris Humphrey?

Most Big Ten schools aren’t going to keep 5 star recruits in state for basketball, but you’d think you’d luck out on a couple 3 or 4 stars developing into well above average players, which I think is what Iowa and Wisconsin have done. It’s not like you need 30 very good players like in football to compete with the better teams. I count one above .500 season in the Big Ten for MN in the last 20 years, kinda sad.

The U tried playing the “Dakota” schools in football. It didn’t turn out well. My advise for the U …….stay away from playing in state schools you can’t beat. It’s a bad look.

Dutchboy wrote:

The U tried playing the “Dakota” schools in football. It didn’t turn out well. My advise for the U …….stay away from playing in state schools you can’t beat. It’s a bad look.

Except they look scared if they don’t so its kind of a lose/lose.

dirtywater wrote:

They are a team worth watching and for now they still play in a gym that’s not much bigger than most high schools.

This won’t last long.

St. Thomas might be an up-and-coming D1 school in athletics, but they have been playing and winning big in D1 Fundraising for decades. It’s astonishing. Nobody in MN can wring a million or twenty out of alums and donors faster than the Tommies.

The only holdup over there is getting the real estate.

TheFamousGrouse wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>dirtywater wrote:</div>
They are a team worth watching and for now they still play in a gym that’s not much bigger than most high schools.

This won’t last long.

St. Thomas might be an up-and-coming D1 school in athletics, but they have been playing and winning big in D1 Fundraising for decades. It’s astonishing. Nobody in MN can wring a million or twenty out of alums and donors faster than the Tommies.

The only holdup over there is getting the real estate.

At one point in the early 2000’s UST had the largest endowment of any private school in the country. Not sure if that is still true but they have literally billions of dollars they are sitting on.

Matt Moen wrote:

At one point in the early 2000’s UST had the largest endowment of any private school in the country state. Not sure if that is still true but they have literally billions of dollars they are sitting on.

UST’s endowment is about $700M right now, and has never been in the billions. Maybe/probably is the biggest private school endowment in the state, but they are not even in the ballpark nationally. Harvard $49B, Yale $40B, Stanford $36B, and Princeton $34B head the private school list (Texas at $44B is highest public school). Top 100 are all over $1B. Gophers endowment is $5.5B fwiw.

BigWerm wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Matt Moen wrote:</div>
At one point in the early 2000’s UST had the largest endowment of any private school in the country state. Not sure if that is still true but they have literally billions of dollars they are sitting on.

UST’s endowment is about $700M right now, and has never been in the billions. Maybe/probably is the biggest private school endowment in the state, but they are not even in the ballpark nationally. Harvard $49B, Yale $40B, Stanford $36B, and Princeton $34B head the private school list (Texas at $44B is highest public school). Top 100 are all over $1B. Gophers endowment is $5.5B fwiw.

It was close to or at a billion bucks in the early 2000’s. I was part of the student government for the MBA program and saw the numbers. Regardless, it’s a poop ton given the size of the school.

Maybe it was the largest among D3 schools…I can’t remember anymore. I drank alot of fireball in the early 2000’s.

As a high school graduate maybe you college boys can explain to me the purpose and value of endowments.

Dutchboy wrote:

As a high school graduate maybe you college boys can explain to me the purpose and value of endowments.

Here you go…straight from google:

A college endowment is a collection of assets that are invested to provide a steady source of income for a college or university. Endowments are a key source of funding for colleges and universities, and are intended to ensure the institution’s long-term financial stability. [1, 2, 3]
How do endowments work? [3, 4]

Funding

Endowments are funded through gifts and donations from alumni and others who support the college. [3, 4]

Investment

The funds are invested to grow over time, and only a portion of the income is spent each year. [2, 5]

Spending

Endowments are managed to balance the need to fund current operations with the need to preserve purchasing power for future operations. [5]

What do endowments support? [1, 2, 6]

• Student financial aid: Endowments can help fund financial assistance for students.
• Faculty: Endowments can help attract and support exceptional faculty.
• Research: Endowments can support research and innovation.
• Programs: Endowments can help expand and develop new programs.

Endowments and risk [5]

• Endowments are not immune to market risks. [5]
• If investment returns don’t keep up with inflation, the purchasing power of the endowment can erode. [7]

Matt Moen wrote:

Here you go…straight from google:

Way too complicated… How about lots of money makes lots of money

So the endowment basically funds the school. In addition to a yearly pile from the state (In the case of the U) Also doesn’t the U (and I assume other schools) make money from research that lead to inventions, formation of comapanies and royalty’s? So in the case of the U there is funding from a $5.5 BILLION endowment. Why do the raise tuition every year? Isn’t that place nearly self funding between endowments and state taxpayer support?

The numbers become mind boggling.

Dutchboy wrote:

So the endowment basically funds the school. In addition to a yearly pile from the state (In the case of the U) Also doesn’t the U (and I assume other schools) make money from research that lead to inventions, formation of comapanies and royalty’s? So in the case of the U there is funding from a $5.5 BILLION endowment. Why do the raise tuition every year? Isn’t that place nearly self funding between endowments and state taxpayer support?

The numbers become mind boggling.

This could go down a rabbit hole but I think of it like this…tuition covers the operating cost of the school. Endowments are for growth and investment aka opening a new research facility. I’m sure for the public universities you could find the disbursement of funds since they have to disclose them.

It does beg the question why the endowments don’t help fund tuition more but that’s not the intent. I know some endowments do fund scholarships.

Matt Moen wrote:

It was close to or at a billion bucks in the early 2000’s. I was part of the student government for the MBA program and saw the numbers. Regardless, it’s a poop ton given the size of the school.

At one point about 10 years ago, UST netted over $500 MILLION during one 5-year campaign that ran through the Great Recession. Half a billion was raised during a huge recession. Gotta admire the drive.

I didn’t realize that construction has already started on the new basketball/hockey arena on campus. I thought it started this year but the frame is already up and opening is targeted for fall of 2025.

I guess they got $75 million from Lee and Penny Anderson to get the puck sliding, so they only had to shake down a few other alums to net the remaining $100 million and change.

On to the football stadium!

The top of this actually talking about basketball got me interested in watching tonights game. Go figure its on Peacock. This is getting old. Thought all games were on ESPN, FS1, or BTN

TheFamousGrouse wrote:

On to the football stadium!

Hot take— UST should cut the football program. It costs a ton of money to transport that many kids now that they’re traveling more widely in their new conference. They should invest heavily in basketball and hockey where they have the best chance to compete nationally, which is supposedly the goal. It’s not unprecedented either. The big Catholic schools like Marquette, creighton, and Gonzaga all lack football programs.

dirtywater wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>TheFamousGrouse wrote:</div>
On to the football stadium!

Hot take— UST should cut the football program. It costs a ton of money to transport that many kids now that they’re traveling more widely in their new conference. They should invest heavily in basketball and hockey where they have the best chance to compete nationally, which is supposedly the goal. It’s not unprecedented either. The big Catholic schools like Marquette, creighton, and Gonzaga all lack football programs.

University of Nebraska Omaha did this…cut football and wrestling so the other sports could prosper. The football and wrestling programs were both D2 powerhouses at the time. I don’t know if it’s been much of a success outside of hockey but there is a precedent.

The AD at the time, Trev Alberts, is now AD at Texas AM so he knows his stuff.

Matt Moen wrote:

University of Nebraska Omaha did this…cut football and wrestling so the other sports could prosper.

When colleges cut football they’ll seldom come out and say it, but are they doing it just for cost reasons or does alleviating Title 9 headaches also play a major part?

It must be a constant concern in a small college to try to stay on the right side of Title IX when they have a football program AND a smaller student body that is, these days, often over half women.

TheFamousGrouse wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Matt Moen wrote:</div>
University of Nebraska Omaha did this…cut football and wrestling so the other sports could prosper.

When colleges cut football they’ll seldom come out and say it, but are they doing it just for cost reasons or does alleviating Title 9 headaches also play a major part?

It must be a constant concern in a small college to try to stay on the right side of Title IX when they have a football program AND a smaller student body that is, these days, often over half women.

I agree but not sure of this was the case here. UNO is 15,000 students so not massive but not small either.

The fallacy I think is that most football programs make money. The largest FBS schools probably do but most do not. Very few athletic departments run in the black. Football is a huge expense and so if it’s draining resources other programs get cut.

Title IX is a big factor in schools discontinuing football, but mainly due to football teams are usually around 100 members. Takes a lot of girls sports teams to make up that #. I don’t think Title IX has anything to do with overall student population demographics though.

Matt Moen wrote:

The fallacy I think is that most football programs make money. The largest FBS schools probably do but most do not. Very few athletic departments run in the black. Football is a huge expense and so if it’s draining resources other programs get cut.

That depends a lot on how you look at it. From just a revenue vs cost perspective it’s a losing battle for most teams outside the Power 5 conferences. However, when you factor in alumni donations most colleges make money or they would all be getting eliminated. I forgot the stats, but at my D3 MIAC school the average football player alumni gave more per capita and more frequently than any other alumni demographic. Plus it’s tough to have Homecoming (huge fundraiser on most campuses) without a football team, ask SCSU. SCSU has made a ton of poor decisions, so it’s not solely due to eliminating football, but their downward trend was surely exacerbated by eliminating football.

BigWerm wrote:

Title IX is a big factor in schools discontinuing football, but mainly due to football teams are usually around 100 members. Takes a lot of girls sports teams to make up that #. I don’t think Title IX has anything to do with overall student population demographics though.

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Matt Moen wrote:</div>
The fallacy I think is that most football programs make money. The largest FBS schools probably do but most do not. Very few athletic departments run in the black. Football is a huge expense and so if it’s draining resources other programs get cut.

That depends a lot on how you look at it. From just a revenue vs cost perspective it’s a losing battle for most teams outside the Power 5 conferences. However, when you factor in alumni donations most colleges make money or they would all be getting eliminated. I forgot the stats, but at my D3 MIAC school the average football player alumni gave more per capita and more frequently than any other alumni demographic. Plus it’s tough to have Homecoming (huge fundraiser on most campuses) without a football team, ask SCSU. SCSU has made a ton of poor decisions, so it’s not solely due to eliminating football, but their downward trend was surely exacerbated by eliminating football.

For sure…it’s nuanced. With NIL now I think you’ll see more alumni going towards football and basketball. I’m not sure how title IX and NIL are going to exist without some more legislation around it.