I had the opportunity to move back to Columbia a little over a year ago. That fact, coupled with a having a student athlete at Mizzou, has given me the opportunity to attend a lot more sporting events, particularly non-revenue. What I've experienced has caused me to wonder: Why are our athletic facilities so bad? Why have we had so little success among the majority of our programs? The recent talk about the need for increased commitment to the baseball program has me thinking about where the money goes and where has it gone historically? Football and basketball are my primary rooting interests and I know Football, and to a lesser extent, Men's Basketball drive the bus and generate the revenue. As such, these programs are and should be, the priority. But at some point, funds have to trickle down. I think the state of all your programs and your facilities are reflective of the overall health of your athletic department.
I know the argument is that to be successful you have to invest in programs. I also realize we aren't and will never have the revenue of Texas, Ohio State or Alabama. However, it seems to me that our programs don't even rank where they should be based on our overall budget. A quick search showed us as ranking 30th a couple of years ago:
NCAA Revenues
And our program's successes don't reflect that same level:
Director's Cup Standings
I feel like I'm pretty realistic in my expectations, but it would be nice to have some programs that excel. Right now, I would say Wrestling is it. I'm in favor of the Beiser firing. I think with most of our programs, a transformative coach is needed, but that's probably a different thread. It drives me crazy to see the facilities and success of so many of the programs at places like Arkansas that we should be able to compete with.
I attribute a lot of the struggles to subpar facilities. The baseball program's needs have been discussed. Track can't even host home meets. The tennis facility was effectively condemned this winter. We're the only SEC school without a soccer-specific stadium. The Hearnes Center is a money pit. The MATC is poorly maintained since football moved to the south end zone. Softball (edited to add Swim/Dive and Gymnastics training) are perhaps the only non-revenue programs with above average facilities and even it was short-changed a bit with lack of indoor hitting, etc if I recall. There's a saying that if you don't have cranes in the air at your athletic facilities, you are falling behind.
AD DRF has talked the talk since she arrived and I am hopeful. I know the AD recently commissioned a consulting company to assess athletics. My question for those of you with more knowledge and insight into the history of the athletic department is how did we get here? Where has the money gone? How are our facilities not on par with so many of our peers?
I know the argument is that to be successful you have to invest in programs. I also realize we aren't and will never have the revenue of Texas, Ohio State or Alabama. However, it seems to me that our programs don't even rank where they should be based on our overall budget. A quick search showed us as ranking 30th a couple of years ago:
NCAA Revenues
And our program's successes don't reflect that same level:
Director's Cup Standings
I feel like I'm pretty realistic in my expectations, but it would be nice to have some programs that excel. Right now, I would say Wrestling is it. I'm in favor of the Beiser firing. I think with most of our programs, a transformative coach is needed, but that's probably a different thread. It drives me crazy to see the facilities and success of so many of the programs at places like Arkansas that we should be able to compete with.
I attribute a lot of the struggles to subpar facilities. The baseball program's needs have been discussed. Track can't even host home meets. The tennis facility was effectively condemned this winter. We're the only SEC school without a soccer-specific stadium. The Hearnes Center is a money pit. The MATC is poorly maintained since football moved to the south end zone. Softball (edited to add Swim/Dive and Gymnastics training) are perhaps the only non-revenue programs with above average facilities and even it was short-changed a bit with lack of indoor hitting, etc if I recall. There's a saying that if you don't have cranes in the air at your athletic facilities, you are falling behind.
AD DRF has talked the talk since she arrived and I am hopeful. I know the AD recently commissioned a consulting company to assess athletics. My question for those of you with more knowledge and insight into the history of the athletic department is how did we get here? Where has the money gone? How are our facilities not on par with so many of our peers?
Last edited:
