EIU FB cutting one scholarship

[ISUBU]

EIU is cutting one scholarship in each sport to reduce costs as enrollment (student fees) has declined.
https://www.dailyeasternnews.com/2...ny-sports-but-plans-on-reducing-scholarships/

 

[DBird]

EIU is cutting one scholarship in each sport to reduce costs as enrollment (student fees) has declined.
https://www.dailyeasternnews.com/2...ny-sports-but-plans-on-reducing-scholarships/

Percentage wise that not nearly as big a hit to football as it would be to Tennis, Golf, CrossCountry and the like. Even 1 Scholy in Basketball would hurt way more than 1 in Football!

 

[fourthandshort]

That's too bad. Illinois reneging on funding has to be hurting them more than most state schools.

 

[cubird]

Surprised they have not eliminated some sport teams. Thay have men soccer and swimming teams.

 

[ChiRedbirdfan]

Surprised they have not eliminated some sport teams. Thay have men soccer and swimming teams.

:text-+1: Agree big time because if you can rid 21 scholarships via eliminating a complete team(s) (vs eliminating 21 scholarships by reducing 1 from each team) then the athletic department also saves by eliminating some coaches pay, team travel, lodging,...etc. The way EIU administration chose to reduce athletic costs was to have all athletic cost reductions be born by the EIU students (now fewer students on scholarship) without EIU athletic administration being impacted. The typical bureaucratic Illinois way.

From an operating perspective I am also a big believer in the concept that an organization can not do everything well especially when resources are limited so try to stay lean and mean. Each EIU team is now marginally disadvantaged and is less likely to succeed and with that comes less support, less $s and more financial strain...etc I would rather have fewer teams that are better equipped to succeed vs having many teams that are less equipped to succeed.

 

[fourthandshort]

Surprised they have not eliminated some sport teams. Thay have men soccer and swimming teams.

:text-+1: Agree big time because if you can rid 21 scholarships via eliminating a complete team(s) (vs eliminating 21 scholarships by reducing 1 from each team) then the athletic department also saves by eliminating some coaches pay, team travel, lodging,...etc. The way EIU administration chose to reduce athletic costs was to have all athletic cost reductions be born by the EIU students (now fewer students on scholarship) without EIU athletic administration being impacted. The typical bureaucratic Illinois way.

From an operating perspective I am also a big believer in the concept that an organization can not do everything well especially when resources are limited so try to stay lean and mean. Each EIU team is now marginally disadvantaged and is less likely to succeed and with that comes less support, less $s and more financial strain...etc I would rather have fewer teams that are better equipped to succeed vs having many teams that are less equipped to succeed.

that's one of those things that is way easier said than done. Exactly how do you tell a current sport their program is cancelled ... is it effective immediately ? If so, how do you handle current schollies ? And if not immediate, how do you tell them it is being phased out ?

Tough situation with no easy answers.

 

[ISUBU]

Surprised they have not eliminated some sport teams. Thay have men soccer and swimming teams.

:text-+1: Agree big time because if you can rid 21 scholarships via eliminating a complete team(s) (vs eliminating 21 scholarships by reducing 1 from each team) then the athletic department also saves by eliminating some coaches pay, team travel, lodging,...etc. The way EIU administration chose to reduce athletic costs was to have all athletic cost reductions be born by the EIU students (now fewer students on scholarship) without EIU athletic administration being impacted. The typical bureaucratic Illinois way.

From an operating perspective I am also a big believer in the concept that an organization can not do everything well especially when resources are limited so try to stay lean and mean. Each EIU team is now marginally disadvantaged and is less likely to succeed and with that comes less support, less $s and more financial strain...etc I would rather have fewer teams that are better equipped to succeed vs having many teams that are less equipped to succeed.

Actually they have chosen this path to maintain enrollment - THAT is their goal. The state is really damaging its universities, but these schools get more revenue from other sources than from their state subsidy. ISU's and U of I's relatively healthy status is because they've been able to maintain strong enrollment even with less state funding.

It's true that if you cut a sport you can eliminate coaches, but you'll also lose all of those students. Lets look at EIU mens soccer. I looked at their Spring 2018 roster - they have 20 players, 16 of which pay out of state tuition. Division I soccer has 9.9 scholarships...lets call it 10, that they divide among those 20 players. They have one coach, one grad assistant, and one volunteer coach. So if EIU cut soccer, they'd save the salaries of one coach and one grad assistant, and a portion of trainers/fundraisers/tutors/team table/etc. The 10 scholarships are a wash - don't need to raise those funds but don't get the tuition and housing either. But they lose 10 players worth of tuition, much of it out of state, and housing. That wouldn't be a big savings in the end.

The path they've chosen saves them the funds of one scholarship, and they'll probably still retain their roster. There are enough kids who want to walk on that they can fill that spot. They totally understand that they're harming competitiveness, but they have concluded it is a smaller harm.

 

[Reggie Redbird]

1.). Consider a 2nd FBS buy game. The more money you get for it, the better. Call Penn State. Call Nebraska. Call any team you can bus to and offer up a game. If they played at Illinois for $400k and at NW for another $400k, they can bus to both of the games and wouldn’t necessarily have to stay overnight before hand (they probably would). Sacrifice a year you know you will be down to get the extra payday. Winning the OVC is the only thing that really matters for them making the playoffs.

2.). Call Hawaii and see if you can get on their schedule. You can get a 12th game that way and it can be a buy game. They played out their in 2006. A second buy game would infuse a lot of cash into their athletic department but not necessarily sacrifice a home game.

This may be the first step toward cutting a sport or two. We’ll see what happens over the next 1-2 years.

 

[ChiRedbirdfan]

Surprised they have not eliminated some sport teams. Thay have men soccer and swimming teams.

:text-+1: Agree big time because if you can rid 21 scholarships via eliminating a complete team(s) (vs eliminating 21 scholarships by reducing 1 from each team) then the athletic department also saves by eliminating some coaches pay, team travel, lodging,...etc. The way EIU administration chose to reduce athletic costs was to have all athletic cost reductions be born by the EIU students (now fewer students on scholarship) without EIU athletic administration being impacted. The typical bureaucratic Illinois way.

From an operating perspective I am also a big believer in the concept that an organization can not do everything well especially when resources are limited so try to stay lean and mean. Each EIU team is now marginally disadvantaged and is less likely to succeed and with that comes less support, less $s and more financial strain...etc I would rather have fewer teams that are better equipped to succeed vs having many teams that are less equipped to succeed.

Actually they have chosen this path to maintain enrollment - THAT is their goal. The state is really damaging its universities, but these schools get more revenue from other sources than from their state subsidy. ISU's and U of I's relatively healthy status is because they've been able to maintain strong enrollment even with less state funding.

It's true that if you cut a sport you can eliminate coaches, but you'll also lose all of those students. Lets look at EIU mens soccer. I looked at their Spring 2018 roster - they have 20 players, 16 of which pay out of state tuition. Division I soccer has 9.9 scholarships...lets call it 10, that they divide among those 20 players. They have one coach, one grad assistant, and one volunteer coach. So if EIU cut soccer, they'd save the salaries of one coach and one grad assistant, and a portion of trainers/fundraisers/tutors/team table/etc. The 10 scholarships are a wash - don't need to raise those funds but don't get the tuition and housing either. But they lose 10 players worth of tuition, much of it out of state, and housing. That wouldn't be a big savings in the end.

The path they've chosen saves them the funds of one scholarship, and they'll probably still retain their roster. There are enough kids who want to walk on that they can fill that spot. They totally understand that they're harming competitiveness, but they have concluded it is a smaller harm.

You can say EIU chose the path to "maintain enrollment" but the article says the athletic department is reducing scholarships because the EIU athletic department can not afford to offer as many scholarships due to the declining enrollment which consequently reduces athletic department revenue. Sounds like a need to reduce expenses to me. Once again no athletic administration costs (including coaches), travel costs or overhead were touched. The students took the direct hit and administration and overhead was not impacted....that is all too often the typical Illinois way.