The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(01-14-2024 09:39 PM)Challenger Wrote:  

(01-12-2024 01:57 PM)mac Wrote:  

(01-12-2024 01:27 PM)monarchfan4life Wrote:  

(01-12-2024 11:20 AM)MonarchsWon Wrote:  All of my kids grew up going to ODU BBALL games literally from birth on. I was a season ticket holder from 1993 until COVID. Before that - I attended all games as a student and went to the CAA Tourney every year. Every year. My kids grew up in the Big Blue Room - that was PACKED mind you - for every home game. Kids running around and having a blast. Young ODU families raising kids in the ODU culture. My kids were very young when ODU was rolling strong and so they have a hard time understanding just how good and how strong of a program ODU BBALL was compared to where we are now. When you think about the "Post Blaine Era" - it's been drab at best and horrible overall. We have fallen so far - it's just hard to believe. You take a fan base that is already aging and deliver 10+ years of bad performance and you do real damage to a fan base. You are not attracting new fans. Your student body isn't becoming life-long fans. ODAF is not benefitting. You are wiping out a fan base and a donor base that will be very tough to bring back into the fold. Winning does solve problems and the program can be restored - JMU is living proof. But you can't get back those years of donations. You can't get back those fans growing up and loving ODU Hoops. They might come to some games with Wins but we've lost the opportunity to make them life long fans. Based on our student body make up and the damage done to the program the past decade - I have real concerns for ODAF and the future. I don't see a growing donor base. I see a donor base in perpetual decline. Look around the stadium - I'd love to know the average age of fans. The program needs a complete overhaul and needs to be induced with new energy and enthusiasm. There is no other argument to be made. We are at the bottom and if changes aren't made - the future is grim for Old Dominion Basketball - which also impacts ODU Football/Baseball/Soccer and all of the Olympic Sports. Dramatic change has to come. I hope it does and I am generally optimistic - but it is hard right now.

I've been a season ticket holder since 1981. There are a great many of us die-hard fans who are getting up there in years, myself included. You cannot sustain a fan base if the product on the court is inferior year after year. I am at a critical juncture in my life where I have to decide whether I want to continue supporting the program with my donation and attendance, and I absolutely love the Monarchs! My decision will be based on what happens immediately following this dreadful season.

AND, you are one of the VERY BEST fans they have ever had. IF they make the right move following the season, my crew and I will be back, I assure you.

Hope that happens. Miss huffing and puffing up the stairs to meet/talk with you and the crew at halftime!!

You are a good man! Those stats were always great and people around us were always like, wow, who are these guys getting stats brought right to their seat!! Not sure our ole friend Ford will ever be back. He lives almost in Carolina now, way out in Suffolk.

It's shocking how little the administration interacts with the fan base. Not saying they need to do every and anything the fans propose, but to not acknowledge long-time loyal fans and supporters like Dancin' etc., is beyond stupid and unprofessional, IMO. I'm sure the jobs at that level aren't great paying, but a level of professionalism should be maintained that would quell some of the dissatisfaction. We used to go to every MBB game and bring our neighbors who never heard of ODU before moving here. They loved the interaction with other fans, but were disappointed in the caliber of play and stopped coming with us. Now we haven't been to a game in 2 years and have no intention to return until something drastic is done. I used to think replacing JJ would be enough. Not any more. Selig must hit the road as well. I've always heard good things about Bruce Stewart and my couple of interactions with him have been more than satisfactory. If not Benson, Bruce would work for me. . . . I would suggest they hold a one-night public forum in the BBR once hoops is over, but no confidence it would ever happen. But it would be a good way to communicate with those who have the most anger toward the program in one night. Could even include a Zoom link for those who can't make it in person.

Sent from my SM-G986U using CSNbbs mobile app

(01-15-2024 09:50 AM)bench jockey Wrote:  It's shocking how little the administration interacts with the fan base. Not saying they need to do every and anything the fans propose, but to not acknowledge long-time loyal fans and supporters like Dancin' etc., is beyond stupid and unprofessional, IMO. I'm sure the jobs at that level aren't great paying, but a level of professionalism should be maintained that would quell some of the dissatisfaction. We used to go to every MBB game and bring our neighbors who never heard of ODU before moving here. They loved the interaction with other fans, but were disappointed in the caliber of play and stopped coming with us. Now we haven't been to a game in 2 years and have no intention to return until something drastic is done. I used to think replacing JJ would be enough. Not any more. Selig must hit the road as well. I've always heard good things about Bruce Stewart and my couple of interactions with him have been more than satisfactory. If not Benson, Bruce would work for me. . . . I would suggest they hold a one-night public forum in the BBR once hoops is over, but no confidence it would ever happen. But it would be a good way to communicate with those who have the most anger toward the program in one night. Could even include a Zoom link for those who can't make it in person.

Sent from my SM-G986U using CSNbbs mobile app

Agree with everything you said. As far as replacing Wood, I consider Bruce a friend and think he is amazing, but I'm not sure even he is the answer at this point. I think we need to go outside the current administration to completely change attitudes and expectations.

You know more about this than I do, and I'll bow to what you think is right for us. BTW, my wife out of the blue last night says to me, "I really miss not going to ODU games." This is a woman who started going with me 15 years ago when she didn't know where the arena was -- and she was a graduate. Sports can have that kind of impact on people, if you handle it right.

Sent from my SM-G986U using CSNbbs mobile app

(01-15-2024 09:50 AM)bench jockey Wrote:  It's shocking how little the administration interacts with the fan base. Not saying they need to do every and anything the fans propose, but to not acknowledge long-time loyal fans and supporters like Dancin' etc., is beyond stupid and unprofessional, IMO. I'm sure the jobs at that level aren't great paying, but a level of professionalism should be maintained that would quell some of the dissatisfaction. We used to go to every MBB game and bring our neighbors who never heard of ODU before moving here. They loved the interaction with other fans, but were disappointed in the caliber of play and stopped coming with us. Now we haven't been to a game in 2 years and have no intention to return until something drastic is done. I used to think replacing JJ would be enough. Not any more. Selig must hit the road as well. I've always heard good things about Bruce Stewart and my couple of interactions with him have been more than satisfactory. If not Benson, Bruce would work for me. . . . I would suggest they hold a one-night public forum in the BBR once hoops is over, but no confidence it would ever happen. But it would be a good way to communicate with those who have the most anger toward the program in one night. Could even include a Zoom link for those who can't make it in person.

Sent from my SM-G986U using CSNbbs mobile app

An open forum with fans , Wood, Hemphill and the BOV is a fantastic idea. They need to hear what the real grassroots supporters have to say. I’d drive the many hours to be a part of that. But maybe they genuinely don’t care and look at us as a thorn in their side. Is it possible that the school we all love and remember just doesn’t exist in the minds of the admin? Meaning, while we all look at ODU as an awesome place that is as good or better than GMU, VCU, Radford, JMU etc, and should be growing and building to meet or surpass the quality and experience offered by those schools, the admin has accepted a mission of becoming 14th and 15th grade. Student pride, a great college experience, campus amenities etc are an after thought because they want to cater to non traditional, working students. Basically becoming the last 2 years of TCC? And if that’s the case and accepted trajectory, what good are sports teams at all, and those of us who think of ODU as the larger older brother of CNU, the little brother of WM and VT, and a community of alums and students are just an annoyance. Maybe the admin wishes they didn’t have sports, dorms or a campus at all, but it’s too late.Did ODU peak as an institution in 2010? Just a random speculation. Not saying it’s true.

(01-15-2024 10:09 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 09:50 AM)bench jockey Wrote:  It's shocking how little the administration interacts with the fan base. Not saying they need to do every and anything the fans propose, but to not acknowledge long-time loyal fans and supporters like Dancin' etc., is beyond stupid and unprofessional, IMO. I'm sure the jobs at that level aren't great paying, but a level of professionalism should be maintained that would quell some of the dissatisfaction. We used to go to every MBB game and bring our neighbors who never heard of ODU before moving here. They loved the interaction with other fans, but were disappointed in the caliber of play and stopped coming with us. Now we haven't been to a game in 2 years and have no intention to return until something drastic is done. I used to think replacing JJ would be enough. Not any more. Selig must hit the road as well. I've always heard good things about Bruce Stewart and my couple of interactions with him have been more than satisfactory. If not Benson, Bruce would work for me. . . . I would suggest they hold a one-night public forum in the BBR once hoops is over, but no confidence it would ever happen. But it would be a good way to communicate with those who have the most anger toward the program in one night. Could even include a Zoom link for those who can't make it in person.

Sent from my SM-G986U using CSNbbs mobile app

Agree with everything you said. As far as replacing Wood, I consider Bruce a friend and think he is amazing, but I'm not sure even he is the answer at this point. I think we need to go outside the current administration to completely change attitudes and expectations.

Do you have Bruce's ear. Surely you have expressed your concerns. Any feedback you care to share?

(01-15-2024 10:27 AM)monarx Wrote:  Student pride, a great college experience, campus amenities etc are an after thought because they want to cater to non traditional, working students. Basically becoming the last 2 years of TCC?

Some campus changes since 2010:
Broderick Dining Commons constructed - adding a beautiful cafeteria to campus
Huge Owens House - adding a massive and nice dorm to campus
New Chem building
Renovations to Webb Center
Ballard Stadium reno
Mitchum facility built
Adding turf to the rec fields
LR Hill expansion
Volleyball facility built
New Health Sciences building
New art museum

Coming soon--
EVMS merger
New biology building
Village expansion - more apartments for students and a grocery store
New Student Health and Wellness building
New Public Safety building
48th Street reno to make it pedestrian only.
Baseball Stadium reno

In what world does this show we are not prioritizing campus amenities and a great college experience for our students?

(01-15-2024 11:09 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 10:27 AM)monarx Wrote:  Student pride, a great college experience, campus amenities etc are an after thought because they want to cater to non traditional, working students. Basically becoming the last 2 years of TCC?

Some campus changes since 2010:
Broderick Dining Commons constructed - adding a beautiful cafeteria to campus
Huge Owens House - adding a massive and nice dorm to campus
New Chem building
Renovations to Webb Center
Ballard Stadium reno
Mitchum facility built
Adding turf to the rec fields
LR Hill expansion
Volleyball facility built
New Health Sciences building
New art museum

Coming soon--
EVMS merger
New biology building
Village expansion - more apartments for students and a grocery store
New Student Health and Wellness building
New Public Safety building
48th Street reno to make it pedestrian only.
Baseball Stadium reno

In what world does this show we are not prioritizing campus amenities and a great college experience for our students?

Those are good things and a fair point. I’m simply speculating based on some other conversations with some who know more than me about ODU We’re all just grasping at straws here looking for answers.

(01-15-2024 11:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:09 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 10:27 AM)monarx Wrote:  Student pride, a great college experience, campus amenities etc are an after thought because they want to cater to non traditional, working students. Basically becoming the last 2 years of TCC?

Some campus changes since 2010:
Broderick Dining Commons constructed - adding a beautiful cafeteria to campus
Huge Owens House - adding a massive and nice dorm to campus
New Chem building
Renovations to Webb Center
Ballard Stadium reno
Mitchum facility built
Adding turf to the rec fields
LR Hill expansion
Volleyball facility built
New Health Sciences building
New art museum

Coming soon--
EVMS merger
New biology building
Village expansion - more apartments for students and a grocery store
New Student Health and Wellness building
New Public Safety building
48th Street reno to make it pedestrian only.
Baseball Stadium reno

In what world does this show we are not prioritizing campus amenities and a great college experience for our students?

Those are good things and a fair point. I’m simply speculating based on some other conversations with some who know more than me about ODU We’re all just grasping at straws here looking for answers.

So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

(01-15-2024 10:21 AM)bench jockey Wrote:  You know more about this than I do, and I'll bow to what you think is right for us. BTW, my wife out of the blue last night says to me, "I really miss not going to ODU games." This is a woman who started going with me 15 years ago when she didn't know where the arena was -- and she was a graduate. Sports can have that kind of impact on people, if you handle it right.

Sent from my SM-G986U using CSNbbs mobile app

To clarify and be fair to Bruce. I think he would make an amazing AD, and whoever hired him to do it will be lucky. I'm just concerned that this entire admin has heard and engrained the excuses as to why ODU can't be exceptional for so long that it will take a fresh start to purge those ideas from the campus.

I remember Dr Koch saying university presidents had a shelf life of around 8-10 years. I certainly agree with the concept and think it should extend down to the different school presidents, AD and others. I should note the BOV has always operated on a time limited appointment, although it can be renewed.

New blood, new energy, new ideas.

(01-15-2024 11:26 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:09 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 10:27 AM)monarx Wrote:  Student pride, a great college experience, campus amenities etc are an after thought because they want to cater to non traditional, working students. Basically becoming the last 2 years of TCC?

Some campus changes since 2010:
Broderick Dining Commons constructed - adding a beautiful cafeteria to campus
Huge Owens House - adding a massive and nice dorm to campus
New Chem building
Renovations to Webb Center
Ballard Stadium reno
Mitchum facility built
Adding turf to the rec fields
LR Hill expansion
Volleyball facility built
New Health Sciences building
New art museum

Coming soon--
EVMS merger
New biology building
Village expansion - more apartments for students and a grocery store
New Student Health and Wellness building
New Public Safety building
48th Street reno to make it pedestrian only.
Baseball Stadium reno

In what world does this show we are not prioritizing campus amenities and a great college experience for our students?

Those are good things and a fair point. I’m simply speculating based on some other conversations with some who know more than me about ODU We’re all just grasping at straws here looking for answers.

So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

Some other folks have “facts” that indicate a disproportional emphasis on non-traditional students and online learning. Two groups that don’t really care or benefit from a robust winning sports program. IF that’s the case I can see where the admin wouldn’t prioritize winning, sports or student booster groups. Others have “facts” about the admin hamstringing athletics unnecessarily. The academic buildings are needed regardless and the sports infrastructure projects are sorely needed and kind of the minimum to even try and compete. The others like the practice facility and art museum were largely privately funded. I agree about the dorms and dining hall, but not sure if they were planned under Runte or Broderick. Runte definitely had a vision and built energy for the on campus population and athletics. Again, just speculation of “what happened” (which is what this whole thread is about. And nobody knows for sure)”, but based on conversations and hearsay from others.

(01-15-2024 05:47 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:26 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:09 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 10:27 AM)monarx Wrote:  Student pride, a great college experience, campus amenities etc are an after thought because they want to cater to non traditional, working students. Basically becoming the last 2 years of TCC?

Some campus changes since 2010:
Broderick Dining Commons constructed - adding a beautiful cafeteria to campus
Huge Owens House - adding a massive and nice dorm to campus
New Chem building
Renovations to Webb Center
Ballard Stadium reno
Mitchum facility built
Adding turf to the rec fields
LR Hill expansion
Volleyball facility built
New Health Sciences building
New art museum

Coming soon--
EVMS merger
New biology building
Village expansion - more apartments for students and a grocery store
New Student Health and Wellness building
New Public Safety building
48th Street reno to make it pedestrian only.
Baseball Stadium reno

In what world does this show we are not prioritizing campus amenities and a great college experience for our students?

Those are good things and a fair point. I’m simply speculating based on some other conversations with some who know more than me about ODU We’re all just grasping at straws here looking for answers.

So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

Some other folks have “facts” that indicate a disproportional emphasis on non-traditional students and online learning. Two groups that don’t really care or benefit from a robust winning sports program. IF that’s the case I can see where the admin wouldn’t prioritize winning, sports or student booster groups. Others have “facts” about the admin hamstringing athletics unnecessarily. The academic buildings are needed regardless and the sports infrastructure projects are sorely needed and kind of the minimum to even try and compete. The others like the practice facility and art museum were largely privately funded. I agree about the dorms and dining hall, but not sure if they were planned under Runte or Broderick. Runte definitely had a vision and built energy for the on campus population and athletics. Again, just speculation of “what happened” (which is what this whole thread is about. And nobody knows for sure)”, but based on conversations and hearsay from others.

All of those administrative hamstrings are from prior administrations. Trying to place that on Hemphill or Wood is misguided.

As for the focus on the online program, I really don’t see how that is negatively impacting the traditional experience because they are operating separately. If they were under the same operation and money was being unevenly being allocated to online, I’d agree. But that’s not the case.

As for the buildings. They were planned and built long affer Runte left. Trying to give her credit for buildings in the master plan from 2013 when she left in 2008 is wild.

Again, speculation when there are enough facts that the traditional experience have been improved is not helpful whatsoever.

Finally, claiming the current administration whether academic or athletic don’t care about athletics is wrong. If they make decisions you don’t agree with, that’s not a sign they don’t care. They just see things differently and have a lot more data to work with than any of us.

(01-15-2024 06:17 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 05:47 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:26 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:09 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  Some campus changes since 2010:
Broderick Dining Commons constructed - adding a beautiful cafeteria to campus
Huge Owens House - adding a massive and nice dorm to campus
New Chem building
Renovations to Webb Center
Ballard Stadium reno
Mitchum facility built
Adding turf to the rec fields
LR Hill expansion
Volleyball facility built
New Health Sciences building
New art museum

Coming soon--
EVMS merger
New biology building
Village expansion - more apartments for students and a grocery store
New Student Health and Wellness building
New Public Safety building
48th Street reno to make it pedestrian only.
Baseball Stadium reno

In what world does this show we are not prioritizing campus amenities and a great college experience for our students?

Those are good things and a fair point. I’m simply speculating based on some other conversations with some who know more than me about ODU We’re all just grasping at straws here looking for answers.

So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

Some other folks have “facts” that indicate a disproportional emphasis on non-traditional students and online learning. Two groups that don’t really care or benefit from a robust winning sports program. IF that’s the case I can see where the admin wouldn’t prioritize winning, sports or student booster groups. Others have “facts” about the admin hamstringing athletics unnecessarily. The academic buildings are needed regardless and the sports infrastructure projects are sorely needed and kind of the minimum to even try and compete. The others like the practice facility and art museum were largely privately funded. I agree about the dorms and dining hall, but not sure if they were planned under Runte or Broderick. Runte definitely had a vision and built energy for the on campus population and athletics. Again, just speculation of “what happened” (which is what this whole thread is about. And nobody knows for sure)”, but based on conversations and hearsay from others.

All of those administrative hamstrings are from prior administrations. Trying to place that on Hemphill or Wood is misguided.

As for the focus on the online program, I really don’t see how that is negatively impacting the traditional experience because they are operating separately. If they were under the same operation and money was being unevenly being allocated to online, I’d agree. But that’s not the case.

As for the buildings. They were planned and built long affer Runte left. Trying to give her credit for buildings in the master plan from 2013 when she left in 2008 is wild.

Again, speculation when there are enough facts that the traditional experience have been improved is not helpful whatsoever.

Finally, claiming the current administration whether academic or athletic don’t care about athletics is wrong. If they make decisions you don’t agree with, that’s not a sign they don’t care. They just see things differently and have a lot more data to work with than any of us.

I literally stated I didn’t know if she or Broderick were to be credited for that and that the buildings were good additions. Moving on…

Change.org petitions are nothing to Selig. Our wrestling petition had over 13,000 names - and Selig admitted to one of our boosters he signed it as “Mickey Mouse.”

(01-15-2024 06:17 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 05:47 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:26 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:09 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  Some campus changes since 2010:
Broderick Dining Commons constructed - adding a beautiful cafeteria to campus
Huge Owens House - adding a massive and nice dorm to campus
New Chem building
Renovations to Webb Center
Ballard Stadium reno
Mitchum facility built
Adding turf to the rec fields
LR Hill expansion
Volleyball facility built
New Health Sciences building
New art museum

Coming soon--
EVMS merger
New biology building
Village expansion - more apartments for students and a grocery store
New Student Health and Wellness building
New Public Safety building
48th Street reno to make it pedestrian only.
Baseball Stadium reno

In what world does this show we are not prioritizing campus amenities and a great college experience for our students?

Those are good things and a fair point. I’m simply speculating based on some other conversations with some who know more than me about ODU We’re all just grasping at straws here looking for answers.

So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

Some other folks have “facts” that indicate a disproportional emphasis on non-traditional students and online learning. Two groups that don’t really care or benefit from a robust winning sports program. IF that’s the case I can see where the admin wouldn’t prioritize winning, sports or student booster groups. Others have “facts” about the admin hamstringing athletics unnecessarily. The academic buildings are needed regardless and the sports infrastructure projects are sorely needed and kind of the minimum to even try and compete. The others like the practice facility and art museum were largely privately funded. I agree about the dorms and dining hall, but not sure if they were planned under Runte or Broderick. Runte definitely had a vision and built energy for the on campus population and athletics. Again, just speculation of “what happened” (which is what this whole thread is about. And nobody knows for sure)”, but based on conversations and hearsay from others.

All of those administrative hamstrings are from prior administrations. Trying to place that on Hemphill or Wood is misguided.

As for the focus on the online program, I really don’t see how that is negatively impacting the traditional experience because they are operating separately. If they were under the same operation and money was being unevenly being allocated to online, I’d agree. But that’s not the case.

As for the buildings. They were planned and built long affer Runte left. Trying to give her credit for buildings in the master plan from 2013 when she left in 2008 is wild.

Again, speculation when there are enough facts that the traditional experience have been improved is not helpful whatsoever.

Finally, claiming the current administration whether academic or athletic don’t care about athletics is wrong. If they make decisions you don’t agree with, that’s not a sign they don’t care. They just see things differently and have a lot more data to work with than any of us.

Their actions have proven they don't care bout sports... At least not enough to be competitive and ensure an appropriate ROI. They got some data saying that JJ is actually doing a great job? They got some data saying that Chartway hasn't turned into a mausoleum? Maybe Stat is providing their data points.

(01-15-2024 08:52 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 06:17 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 05:47 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:26 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:21 AM)monarx Wrote:  Those are good things and a fair point. I’m simply speculating based on some other conversations with some who know more than me about ODU We’re all just grasping at straws here looking for answers.

So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

Some other folks have “facts” that indicate a disproportional emphasis on non-traditional students and online learning. Two groups that don’t really care or benefit from a robust winning sports program. IF that’s the case I can see where the admin wouldn’t prioritize winning, sports or student booster groups. Others have “facts” about the admin hamstringing athletics unnecessarily. The academic buildings are needed regardless and the sports infrastructure projects are sorely needed and kind of the minimum to even try and compete. The others like the practice facility and art museum were largely privately funded. I agree about the dorms and dining hall, but not sure if they were planned under Runte or Broderick. Runte definitely had a vision and built energy for the on campus population and athletics. Again, just speculation of “what happened” (which is what this whole thread is about. And nobody knows for sure)”, but based on conversations and hearsay from others.

All of those administrative hamstrings are from prior administrations. Trying to place that on Hemphill or Wood is misguided.

As for the focus on the online program, I really don’t see how that is negatively impacting the traditional experience because they are operating separately. If they were under the same operation and money was being unevenly being allocated to online, I’d agree. But that’s not the case.

As for the buildings. They were planned and built long affer Runte left. Trying to give her credit for buildings in the master plan from 2013 when she left in 2008 is wild.

Again, speculation when there are enough facts that the traditional experience have been improved is not helpful whatsoever.

Finally, claiming the current administration whether academic or athletic don’t care about athletics is wrong. If they make decisions you don’t agree with, that’s not a sign they don’t care. They just see things differently and have a lot more data to work with than any of us.

Their actions have proven they don't care bout sports... At least not enough to be competitive and ensure an appropriate ROI. They got some data saying that JJ is actually doing a great job? They got some data saying that Chartway hasn't turned into a mausoleum? Maybe Stat is providing their data points.

There’s enough hints in this discussion to tell you there is a lot more going on than just wins and losses.

(01-15-2024 09:29 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 08:52 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 06:17 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 05:47 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:26 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

Some other folks have “facts” that indicate a disproportional emphasis on non-traditional students and online learning. Two groups that don’t really care or benefit from a robust winning sports program. IF that’s the case I can see where the admin wouldn’t prioritize winning, sports or student booster groups. Others have “facts” about the admin hamstringing athletics unnecessarily. The academic buildings are needed regardless and the sports infrastructure projects are sorely needed and kind of the minimum to even try and compete. The others like the practice facility and art museum were largely privately funded. I agree about the dorms and dining hall, but not sure if they were planned under Runte or Broderick. Runte definitely had a vision and built energy for the on campus population and athletics. Again, just speculation of “what happened” (which is what this whole thread is about. And nobody knows for sure)”, but based on conversations and hearsay from others.

All of those administrative hamstrings are from prior administrations. Trying to place that on Hemphill or Wood is misguided.

As for the focus on the online program, I really don’t see how that is negatively impacting the traditional experience because they are operating separately. If they were under the same operation and money was being unevenly being allocated to online, I’d agree. But that’s not the case.

As for the buildings. They were planned and built long affer Runte left. Trying to give her credit for buildings in the master plan from 2013 when she left in 2008 is wild.

Again, speculation when there are enough facts that the traditional experience have been improved is not helpful whatsoever.

Finally, claiming the current administration whether academic or athletic don’t care about athletics is wrong. If they make decisions you don’t agree with, that’s not a sign they don’t care. They just see things differently and have a lot more data to work with than any of us.

Their actions have proven they don't care bout sports... At least not enough to be competitive and ensure an appropriate ROI. They got some data saying that JJ is actually doing a great job? They got some data saying that Chartway hasn't turned into a mausoleum? Maybe Stat is providing their data points.

There’s enough hints in this discussion to tell you there is a lot more going on than just wins and losses.

I'm pretty sure the results on the field/ court prove it's not just about wins and losses.

(01-15-2024 09:29 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 08:52 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 06:17 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 05:47 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(01-15-2024 11:26 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  So you’re just speculating even though facts point to the opposite? How is that helpful?

Some other folks have “facts” that indicate a disproportional emphasis on non-traditional students and online learning. Two groups that don’t really care or benefit from a robust winning sports program. IF that’s the case I can see where the admin wouldn’t prioritize winning, sports or student booster groups. Others have “facts” about the admin hamstringing athletics unnecessarily. The academic buildings are needed regardless and the sports infrastructure projects are sorely needed and kind of the minimum to even try and compete. The others like the practice facility and art museum were largely privately funded. I agree about the dorms and dining hall, but not sure if they were planned under Runte or Broderick. Runte definitely had a vision and built energy for the on campus population and athletics. Again, just speculation of “what happened” (which is what this whole thread is about. And nobody knows for sure)”, but based on conversations and hearsay from others.

All of those administrative hamstrings are from prior administrations. Trying to place that on Hemphill or Wood is misguided.

As for the focus on the online program, I really don’t see how that is negatively impacting the traditional experience because they are operating separately. If they were under the same operation and money was being unevenly being allocated to online, I’d agree. But that’s not the case.

As for the buildings. They were planned and built long affer Runte left. Trying to give her credit for buildings in the master plan from 2013 when she left in 2008 is wild.

Again, speculation when there are enough facts that the traditional experience have been improved is not helpful whatsoever.

Finally, claiming the current administration whether academic or athletic don’t care about athletics is wrong. If they make decisions you don’t agree with, that’s not a sign they don’t care. They just see things differently and have a lot more data to work with than any of us.

Their actions have proven they don't care bout sports... At least not enough to be competitive and ensure an appropriate ROI. They got some data saying that JJ is actually doing a great job? They got some data saying that Chartway hasn't turned into a mausoleum? Maybe Stat is providing their data points.

There’s enough hints in this discussion to tell you there is a lot more going on than just wins and losses.

There is nothing that could make the state of the athletic program acceptable. Period.

You can come in here with all your cryptic excuses based off whatever BS the admin is feeding you, but there is not and cannot be any excuse for the deterioration of this once proud athletic program that has taken place over the last decade.

And this is why I said that a new AD needs to be from outside the program. These people actually have all bought into the BS excuses for why the program can't be exceptional.

Here is a question for you 13, and the others who constantly defend the AD. We hear you talk a lot about how it's not as bad as people think, and how there are obstacles in the way, but why don't you ever discuss how the program can get better, what improvements are needed to get our basketball program out of the worst decade in its history, what is needed to get football out of a state of perpetual mediocrity, what needs to be done to increase fan engagement? I get that you can't take shots at the failures of the admin, and that you seem to believe all of their whining, bit who is actually discussing how we get better as an entire athletic department. I'm not asking what positions we need better players at. I'm not really asking what coaches need to be replaced. There is a much larger question as to what the vision is, which requires an honest take on where we are currently. Whenever I hear Wood, or anyone else close to the admin, all I hear are excuses as to why we are not better, but I never hear him say, this is what we aspire to, and these are the ways we are working to get there.

(01-15-2024 09:44 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Here is a question for you 13, and the others who constantly defend the AD. We hear you talk a lot about how it's not as bad as people think, and how there are obstacles in the way, but why don't you ever discuss how the program can get better, what improvements are needed to get our basketball program out of the worst decade in its history, what is needed to get football out of a state of perpetual mediocrity, what needs to be done to increase fan engagement? I get that you can't take shots at the failures of the admin, and that you seem to believe all of their whining, bit who is actually discussing how we get better as an entire athletic department. I'm not asking what positions we need better players at. I'm not really asking what coaches need to be replaced. There is a much larger question as to what the vision is, which requires an honest take on where we are currently. Whenever I hear Wood, or anyone else close to the admin, all I hear are excuses as to why we are not better, but I never hear him say, this is what we aspire to, and these are the ways we are working to get there.

Ignoring all of the snide shots you’re taking at me in your rude response, there are a few things the admin (or any admin) needs to do to make us a more nimble organization. First, I would recommend them to de-compartmentalize and bring more of their contracted services in house. This would allow shared budgets and shared visions for things like donations and ticket sales. We are set up like a corporation and it slows things down and leads to competing goals.

Second, they need to erase the bad measures placed on the AD and foundation by previous administrations. This could be a painful thing for the university as it would re-allocate some costs back to the university. But the foundation is responsible for some costs a lot of university’s cover and we have some costs where the lions share is on the foundation when compared to our competitors. This results in us working from behind each year and forcing us to raise more and more money to just operate.

One last example would be some state policies that are resulting in bigger costs for our athletic department. All Virginia colleges are required to pay the scholarship bill of their student athletes at the appropriate rate of where the student is from. Our competition in the Sun Belt allows student athletes scholarship bills to be at the in state rate. And of course the dreaded Cox Bill. I’d work on changing both laws to give us a more even footing with the competition we have in the Sun Belt.

It doesn’t matter who is leading the athletic department, these issues will be hampering whoever is in charge from running this athletic department the way fans expect. But none of these changes will be easy to pull off and each one will have their own separate challenges from making them a reality.