ADVERTISEMENT

Board of Trustee Meeting Updated

Boz

Junior
May 29, 2001
2,588
5,924
113

  • An additional $31 million operating loan, also to be repaid with interest, as UK Athletics moves into its new operating and governance model and incurs additional new expenses.
These monies caught eye. Could this be Stoops last season?
 

  • An additional $31 million operating loan, also to be repaid with interest, as UK Athletics moves into its new operating and governance model and incurs additional new expenses.
These monies caught eye. Could this be Stoops last season?
I’ll be shocked if it isn’t.
 
I also noticed this nugget:
  • A Requestion For Information (RFI) to develop an Entertainment District on the UK campus, which could include concepts such as restaurants, hotels and other entertainment options.
This is probably similar to what UT is doing to create new revenue for the athletic department.
 

  • An additional $31 million operating loan, also to be repaid with interest, as UK Athletics moves into its new operating and governance model and incurs additional new expenses.
These monies caught eye. Could this be Stoops last season?
That is a good catch. Stoops will be about $27 million after this year and add in assistant. Hmmmm, makes you wonder.
 
And aren’t they building a bourbon place (owned by uk) in front of stadium by nicholasville road? Wonder if they could have a patio/restaurant there or woukd that still be campus so not allowed since it’s a “dry” campus?
 
I also noticed this nugget:
  • A Requestion For Information (RFI) to develop an Entertainment District on the UK campus, which could include concepts such as restaurants, hotels and other entertainment options.
This is probably similar to what UT is doing to create new revenue for the athletic department.
I’ve been calling for this for years!
 
And aren’t they building a bourbon place (owned by uk) in front of stadium by nicholasville road? Wonder if they could have a patio/restaurant there or woukd that still be campus so not allowed since it’s a “dry” campus?
It’s a teaching facility, but I spose it’s not totally out of the question
 
That is a good catch. Stoops will be about $27 million after this year and add in assistant. Hmmmm, makes you wonder.
I’d suspect the loan is more about helping the department cover increased expenses until some of the new revenue sources they’re pursuing come online. They won’t be able to turn on an entertainment district overnight. Unless the department slashes costs this year, I’m guessing they’ll run a deficit.
 
I’d suspect the loan is more about helping the department cover increased expenses until some of the new revenue sources they’re pursuing come online. They won’t be able to turn on an entertainment district overnight. Unless the department slashes costs this year, I’m guessing they’ll run a deficit.
Yeah….wishful thinking on my part. It is going to take then awhile to come up with the money needed to cover additional scholarships throughout the athletic department and revenue sharing. Good way to spread it out.
 
Don't count this 2025 team out. I still feel that we have upgraded our talent on offense and defense. I feel the best for UK is to have a good year in football and basketball. Then MS decides to retire with a much lower buyout. JS is hired right after the season and he has time to put together a roster. We need a strong football program to survive.
Sure hope you're right!
 
Don't count this 2025 team out. I still feel that we have upgraded our talent on offense and defense. I feel the best for UK is to have a good year in football and basketball. Then MS decides to retire with a much lower buyout. JS is hired right after the season and he has time to put together a roster. We need a strong football program to survive.
How good of a recruiter would JS be in the SEC? Is he capable of getting 4 star linemen as an example? Would the recruiting playing field gap be narrowed for us?
 
Stubborn as Mark is, he will leave the same way Cal did. No one enjoys being completely reviled at their workplace. A shame for it to come to this but hey, thanks Mitch, you bumpkin dumbass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blouman
Stubborn as Mark is, he will leave the same way Cal did. No one enjoys being completely reviled at their workplace. A shame for it to come to this but hey, thanks Mitch, you bumpkin dumbass.
Don't see him going out like Cal. One he doesn't recruit well, boring offense, timid and he's not a hot name. If you said this after the 18 and 19 seasons then yes.
 

  • An additional $31 million operating loan, also to be repaid with interest, as UK Athletics moves into its new operating and governance model and incurs additional new expenses.
These monies caught eye. Could this be Stoops last season?

The two issues are unrelated.

We already know you don't like Mark Stoops.
 

  • An additional $31 million operating loan, also to be repaid with interest, as UK Athletics moves into its new operating and governance model and incurs additional new expenses.
These monies caught eye. Could this be Stoops last season?

Notice they didn't break out expenditures. They just had a giant lump sum and mentioned football.

For anyone new to state or giant corporate governance, that means the bulk of the money is not actually going to football. They just tied it to football to make it sound better.
 
Notice they didn't break out expenditures. They just had a giant lump sum and mentioned football.

For anyone new to state or giant corporate governance, that means the bulk of the money is not actually going to football. They just tied it to football to make it sound better.
In your opinion, that is. There is no evidence in this particular case for what you are opining.
 
I am not saying you won't be. I am saying these are very fluid times and nothing is predictable. What did Yogi Berra say? Predicting is hard, especially about the future. LOL.

If you are in line with everyone else there is no reason to hold back. Remember, stoope and co said laat year it was tougher to recruit because we didn't have a stated profit share position.

The lack if a position means there is a variance. That means football us getting less. The only other explanation is AD malpractice of another sort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vhcat70
If you are in line with everyone else there is no reason to hold back. Remember, stoope and co said laat year it was tougher to recruit because we didn't have a stated profit share position.

The lack if a position means there is a variance. That means football us getting less. The only other explanation is AD malpractice of another sort.

You are a knowledgeable football fan. I frequently like and support your comments. It seems you and others are now making a case that UK football is not being supported, ostensibly because of some kind of historical neglect at UK that allegedly continues. That fits the "curse of the Bear" and the confirmation bias that is currently so popular on this board. You may be right about the small part of it that is related to state revenues. I can't really speak to that in terms of granularity like you can. It's an area of expertise for you so I accept that part of what you are saying even though it is educated speculation.

But support of UK athletics goes way, way beyond state revenues. Revenues for UK athletics are primarily derived from $billions in SEC profit sharing and TV network revenues, as well as paraphernalia and ticket revenues, corporate support, and other private donations. Just reviewing overriding financial facts.

President Todd hired Mitch Barnhart (a "football AD") to reconstruct UK's football program. At that time, back in 2002, UK football was on NCAA probation because of "lack of institutional control" and outrageous malfeasance by renegade boosters who had nearly unfettered control of our athletics department under Cliff Hagan, CM Newton, and Larry Ivey. After Newton resigned, the same boosters purchased a luxury vacation home for him in the Bahamas as a reward. This is based on published reports at the time and you can look them up if you want. The rules were different back then, and cheating was rampant. The NCAA nearly named UK as the 2nd school ever to receive its "death penalty", which would have put UK's athletics department out of business for 24 months. A 3 year set of sanctions had been imposed on UK football recruiting. That's what Barnhart inherited.

Although no one wanted the job, Barnhart managed to hire Rich Brooks, who rebuilt the roster and eventually took UK to a series of bowl games. When Brooks retired, he recommended his OC, Joker Phillips (former UK all SEC receiver) for the job. Barnhart made the mistake of accepting Brooks' recommendation in 2010, but corrected that mistake after the 2013 season by hiring Stoops to replace Phillips.

During Stoops' tenure, every UK football facility has been replaced or renovated to state of the art. It was reported in the last several days that UK is preparing to spend roughly another $40 million on Kroger Field although those funds ARE NOT BEING SHARED WITH OUR BASKETBALL PROGRAM.

Barnhart has overseen recovery of UK football from a sanctioned program one violation away from the "death penalty" to a program that wins difficult FL bowl games. It's true that Mark Stoops' performance has declined for the last several seasons. But that's a different subject from institutional support. UK's football facilities are top notch. UK's coaching staff payroll is at an all time high. UK's recruiting budget is at an all time high. The alleged lack of institutional support for football is a false narrative that does not exist.
 
Last edited:
It was reported in the last several days that UK is preparing to spend roughly another $40 million on Kroger Field although those funds ARE NOT BEING SHARED WITH OUR BASKETBALL PROGRAM.
Why would funds for Kroger Field EVER be shared with the Basketball program?

What does that even mean? How and more importantly, WHY would you ever share funding for a football stadium with a basketball team?
 
Why would funds for Kroger Field EVER be shared with the Basketball program?

What does that even mean? How and more importantly, WHY would you ever share funding for a football stadium with a basketball team?
Every project has it's own allotment. their list had a priority. I'm sure in another year or two once these priority projects get underway, Basketball will see some priority projects come their way. updating the Craft Center and the player dorms would be first on that list I assume.
 
You are a knowledgeable football fan. I frequently like and support your comments. It seems you and others are now making a case that UK football is not being supported, ostensibly because of some kind of historical neglect at UK that allegedly continues. That fits the "curse of the Bear" and the confirmation bias that is currently so popular on this board. You may be right about the small part of it that is related to state revenues. I can't really speak to that in terms of granularity like you can. It's an area of expertise for you so I accept that part of what you are saying even though it is educated speculation.

But support of UK athletics goes way, way beyond state revenues. Revenues for UK athletics are primarily derived from $billions in SEC profit sharing and TV network revenues, as well as paraphernalia and ticket revenues, corporate support, and other private donations. Just reviewing overriding financial facts.

President Todd hired Mitch Barnhart (a "football AD") to reconstruct UK's football program. At that time, back in 2002, UK football was on NCAA probation because of "lack of institutional control" and outrageous malfeasance by renegade boosters who had nearly unfettered control of our athletics department under Cliff Hagan, CM Newton, and Larry Ivey. After Newton resigned, the same boosters purchased a luxury vacation home for him in the Bahamas as a reward. This is based on published reports at the time and you can look them up if you want. The rules were different back then, and cheating was rampant. The NCAA nearly named UK as the 2nd school ever to receive its "death penalty", which would have put UK's athletics department out of business for 24 months. A 3 year set of sanctions had been imposed on UK football recruiting. That's what Barnhart inherited.

Although no one wanted the job, Barnhart managed to hire Rich Brooks, who rebuilt the roster and eventually took UK to a series of bowl games. When Brooks retired, he recommended his OC, Joker Phillips (former UK all SEC receiver) for the job. Barnhart made the mistake of accepting Brooks' recommendation in 2010, but corrected that mistake after the 2013 season by hiring Stoops to replace Phillips.

During Stoops' tenure, every UK football facility has been replaced or renovated to state of the art. It was reported in the last several days that UK is preparing to spend roughly another $40 million on Kroger Field although those funds ARE NOT BEING SHARED WITH OUR BASKETBALL PROGRAM.

Barnhart has overseen recovery of UK football from a sanctioned program one violation away from the "death penalty" to a program that wins difficult FL bowl games. It's true that Mark Stoops' performance has declined for the last several seasons. But that's a different subject from institutional support. UK's football facilities are top notch. UK's coaching staff payroll is at an all time high. UK's recruiting budget is at an all time high. The alleged lack of institutional support for football is a false narrative that does not exist.
As you are well aware, he mood of the moment overides everthing esle including perspective and history in most cases. I think someone once called it the fallout of a "Microwave Society". I'm not taking shots at others cause I fall victim to it myself and its hard not to react short sided and angry at bad times when we want it to be back to the good some much.

I just wish we could change the tone and narrative a little in these situations to less of an angry throw them bums out to more of a well it's a shame but things just arent working out but we appreciate all you did and for the good times we had kind of thing. Why does everything have to go from love and euphoria in the beginning to we hate you so get your ass out of here in the end like the first part never happened.

Stoops and Co arent losing games to piss everybody off. They dont make bad decisions or slip in their focus to do that either. It just happens at every school at every point eventually with every staff and leadership. I cant even beat him up for the A & M things. It was badly handled and he shouldnt have done it but even him trying to look out for himself doesnt erase all the heart and soul he put into this place before that and how much he liked being here and apprecated the fan base. Same goes for Mitch and all he's done.
 
You are a knowledgeable football fan. I frequently like and support your comments. It seems you and others are now making a case that UK football is not being supported, ostensibly because of some kind of historical neglect at UK that allegedly continues. That fits the "curse of the Bear" and the confirmation bias that is currently so popular on this board. You may be right about the small part of it that is related to state revenues. I can't really speak to that in terms of granularity like you can. It's an area of expertise for you so I accept that part of what you are saying even though it is educated speculation.

But support of UK athletics goes way, way beyond state revenues. Revenues for UK athletics are primarily derived from $billions in SEC profit sharing and TV network revenues, as well as paraphernalia and ticket revenues, corporate support, and other private donations. Just reviewing overriding financial facts.

President Todd hired Mitch Barnhart (a "football AD") to reconstruct UK's football program. At that time, back in 2002, UK football was on NCAA probation because of "lack of institutional control" and outrageous malfeasance by renegade boosters who had nearly unfettered control of our athletics department under Cliff Hagan, CM Newton, and Larry Ivey. After Newton resigned, the same boosters purchased a luxury vacation home for him in the Bahamas as a reward. This is based on published reports at the time and you can look them up if you want. The rules were different back then, and cheating was rampant. The NCAA nearly named UK as the 2nd school ever to receive its "death penalty", which would have put UK's athletics department out of business for 24 months. A 3 year set of sanctions had been imposed on UK football recruiting. That's what Barnhart inherited.

Although no one wanted the job, Barnhart managed to hire Rich Brooks, who rebuilt the roster and eventually took UK to a series of bowl games. When Brooks retired, he recommended his OC, Joker Phillips (former UK all SEC receiver) for the job. Barnhart made the mistake of accepting Brooks' recommendation in 2010, but corrected that mistake after the 2013 season by hiring Stoops to replace Phillips.

During Stoops' tenure, every UK football facility has been replaced or renovated to state of the art. It was reported in the last several days that UK is preparing to spend roughly another $40 million on Kroger Field although those funds ARE NOT BEING SHARED WITH OUR BASKETBALL PROGRAM.

Barnhart has overseen recovery of UK football from a sanctioned program one violation away from the "death penalty" to a program that wins difficult FL bowl games. It's true that Mark Stoops' performance has declined for the last several seasons. But that's a different subject from institutional support. UK's football facilities are top notch. UK's coaching staff payroll is at an all time high. UK's recruiting budget is at an all time high. The alleged lack of institutional support for football is a false narrative that does not exist.

I appreciate the kind words. I don't think its a curse. I think its Mitch not providing a statement because he knows the position will be less football friendly than the rest of the league.

Recruiting with modest nil is hard enough as it is. We cant add on weaker revenue sharing too.

If he really plans to follow what appears to be the universal approach, he needs to say that now. There is no more cause for delay. Stoops was already frustrated months ago because other schools announced their House plan yet Mitch still hasnt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaptainBoogerBuns
I appreciate the kind words. I don't think its a curse. I think its Mitch not providing a statement because he knows the position will be less football friendly than the rest of the league.

Recruiting with modest nil is hard enough as it is. We cant add on weaker revenue sharing too.

If he really plans to follow what appears to be the universal approach, he needs to say that now. There is no more cause for delay. Stoops was already frustrated months ago because other schools announced their House plan yet Mitch still hasnt.
So have all the other SEC schools (Vandy unknown) published their allocations?
 
Idk if all have but several have. There were whispers months ago about the football staff being upset they were recruiting against schools with a revenue sharing plan ready to go.
Only 2 SEC schools have publicly announced how revenue sharing will be allocated across sports: Georgia and Texas. LSU’s AD said they’ll roughly follow the framework outlined in the House Settlement, but didn’t mention any specific percentages.

Other than that, none of the other SEC schools have indicated how they’ll split revenue sharing across sports. In fact, the vast majority of schools have not said how they’ll split revenue across sports, and frankly, they really shouldn’t. There’s not much to be gained from doing so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NewWildcatOrder
Only 2 SEC schools have publicly announced how revenue sharing will be allocated across sports: Georgia and Texas. LSU’s AD said they’ll roughly follow the framework outlined in the House Settlement, but didn’t mention any specific percentages.

Other than that, none of the other SEC schools have indicated how they’ll split revenue sharing across sports. In fact, the vast majority of schools have not said how they’ll split revenue across sports, and frankly, they really shouldn’t. There’s not much to be gained from doing so.

I know you are a constant AD apologist but cmon.

Money is the name of the game in today's recruiting. You will get a slight discount here and there but on the whole if you will lose if offering less than someone you are recruiting against.

We will just doom ourselves to mediocrity in sec recruiting. I guess we will just have extract revenge in water polo and bowling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blue Bigfoot
I know you are a constant AD apologist but cmon.

Money is the name of the game in today's recruiting. You will get a slight discount here and there but on the whole if you will lose if offering less than someone you are recruiting against.

We will just doom ourselves to mediocrity in sec recruiting. I guess we will just have extract revenge in water polo and bowling.
I was responding to criticisms about not publicly announcing the percentage of revenue that will be shared with each sport individually. Athletes don’t care about that. Athletes care about how much you are offering them specifically.

There’s not much to be gained from making a public proclamation about what percentage will go to football other than to satisfy fans who don’t seem to be familiar with how things work or how most schools handle things.

My post wasn’t being an apologist for Barnhart. It was setting the record straight on what’s happening across schools. Didn’t the Missouri AD just recently state explicitly that they are keeping the splits confidential because they saw no upside to making a public statement?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bthaunert
I was responding to criticisms about not publicly announcing the percentage of revenue that will be shared with each sport individually. Athletes don’t care about that. Athletes care about how much you are offering them specifically.

There’s not much to be gained from making a public proclamation about what percentage will go to football other than to satisfy fans who don’t seem to be familiar with how things work or how most schools handle things.

My post wasn’t being an apologist for Barnhart. It was setting the record straight on what’s happening across schools. Didn’t the Missouri AD just recently state explicitly that they are keeping the splits confidential because they saw no upside to making a public statement?
In our case it needs to be disclosed. It's public record anyway. It's a govt institution. Ticket holders have a right to know.
 
In our case it needs to be disclosed. It's public record anyway. It's a govt institution. Ticket holders have a right to know.
Athletics uses exactly $0 tax dollars from the state to run its operation and is moving to a private, for-profit structure. They owe tax payers zero explanation of how they are splitting the money.
 
Athletics uses exactly $0 tax dollars from the state to run its operation and is moving to a private, for-profit structure. They owe tax payers zero explanation of how they are splitting the money.
They owe ticket holders. Think about it. There are stakeholders who are wanting to know the results. The concept was publicized, afterall
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT