Drawing from georgiadogs.com Paul has made it clear that the Georgia Sports Blog has good reason to oppose an indoor practice facility for the football team. The issue has come up once again after Mark Richt's mild, frustrated outburst over the rain and lightning that canceled Friday's practice and was followed by an unsolicited apology. This again inspired some Georgia folk to cry out for an indoor practice facility.
Despite this renewed demand, the case against an indoor practice facility remains strong. We still recruit well without one, we still have over $100 million in long term debt for recent facilities improvements, we just built some of the best dorms in the country for our players, and we still compete at a high level nationally. Plus, the team we can't seem to beat, Florida, is the only other team in the conference who also lacks a place to hide from the elements. It doesn't seem to have effected their performance over the past decade or so.
Despite Richt's comments, the athletic department doesn't think an indoor facility is necessary even if we had the money laying around. The Investing in Champions fundraising kick that Damon Evans is currently on doesn't allocate any of its $60 million goal to an indoor facility. Improvements to Sanford Stadium, the Rankin Smith Academic Center, Butts-Mehre upgrades, and the Dan Magill Tennis Center all got a chunk of the new money, but not an indoor practice facility. I bet that Damon at least ran those priorities by Coach Richt, UGA's most important coach, when they set goals for this fundraising campaign. My guess is that Richt saw more pressing needs elsewhere. Plus, we had far more in unallocated revenue in 2005 than the total cost of an indoor practice facility. My point is that if we had a glaring need for an indoor practice facility, we would have one by now. Evidently, Evans and Richt feel that the money is better spent helping other programs and improving other football facilities.
I say relax. It would be nice to have a state of the art practice facility to make sure our players don't miss one rep, but it is far from essential. It will not cost us our coach and it is unlikely to cost us more than a few inconveniences during the season.
Despite this renewed demand, the case against an indoor practice facility remains strong. We still recruit well without one, we still have over $100 million in long term debt for recent facilities improvements, we just built some of the best dorms in the country for our players, and we still compete at a high level nationally. Plus, the team we can't seem to beat, Florida, is the only other team in the conference who also lacks a place to hide from the elements. It doesn't seem to have effected their performance over the past decade or so.
Despite Richt's comments, the athletic department doesn't think an indoor facility is necessary even if we had the money laying around. The Investing in Champions fundraising kick that Damon Evans is currently on doesn't allocate any of its $60 million goal to an indoor facility. Improvements to Sanford Stadium, the Rankin Smith Academic Center, Butts-Mehre upgrades, and the Dan Magill Tennis Center all got a chunk of the new money, but not an indoor practice facility. I bet that Damon at least ran those priorities by Coach Richt, UGA's most important coach, when they set goals for this fundraising campaign. My guess is that Richt saw more pressing needs elsewhere. Plus, we had far more in unallocated revenue in 2005 than the total cost of an indoor practice facility. My point is that if we had a glaring need for an indoor practice facility, we would have one by now. Evidently, Evans and Richt feel that the money is better spent helping other programs and improving other football facilities.
I say relax. It would be nice to have a state of the art practice facility to make sure our players don't miss one rep, but it is far from essential. It will not cost us our coach and it is unlikely to cost us more than a few inconveniences during the season.
8 comments:
Except for occasional inconvenience I can't see a legitimate argument for an indoor practice facility, and occasional inconvenience isn't much of an argument. One other thought about why it isn't such a great idea: where would you put it? The University is already short of space for parking and classrooms and research facilities, and I can't see where you would put it that would make any sense. Even the current practice field takes up every inch of free space without having a building around it. I guess you could put it on some of the agricultural property UGA has in Oconee or Greene County. But that's not so ideal - might as well bus 'em to Flowery Branch.
Ask Herschel. If he thinks we need it and he writes a check then it's a done deal.
I am so glad to have Richt at UGA.
An indoor practice facility can be used by more then just the football team.
Yeah, but they are the only team that generates the income to pay for it.
Whether the band or the women's softball team, track, whatever, can also use it gives very little extra validity to the argument to build one.
I agree with your post. In any business (yes college football is a business) you have to justify any expenditure over a predetermined amount. You don't just go into your bosses office and say we need to spend several million dollars on something because I want it.
Honestly how many days out of the football season would there actually be a use for it, even for other sports?
If we played indoors I could see having the facility. But this aint Syracuse, so how do really justify the means?
Quinton, glad to have you on board.
You wrote: "I bet that Damon at least ran those priorities by Coach Richt, UGA's most important coach, when they set goals for this fundraising campaign." Do you have any knowledge or evidence that that happened or that it was likely to happen? Just curious.
Thanks, and, once again, glad to have you writing here.
No hard evidence, but its just a strong hunch. I'd imagine that every coach at least went over the facility priorities with Damon when the athletic department started the campaign. It just stands to reason that the man in charge would consult the person responsible for his most profitable operation.
Post a Comment