Big-time college football and rapes

While AD Rob Mullens and Duck apologists like VP for Enrollment Roger Thompson love to talk about the benefits of the Duck’s big-time sports enterprise, there are a few costs as well. Former UO economics professor Jason Lindo (now at Texas A&M) and coauthors (including Isaac Swensen a UO PhD grad) have some new estimates on one non-pecuniary cost, in an NBER working paper here:

This paper considers the degree to which events that intensify partying increase sexual assault. Estimates are based on panel data from campus and local law-enforcement agencies and an identification strategy that exploits plausibly random variation in the timing of Division 1 football games. The estimates indicate that these events increase daily reports of rape with 17-24 year old victims by 28 percent. The effects are driven largely by 17-24 year old offenders and by offenders unknown to the victim, but we also find significant effects on incidents involving offenders of other ages and on incidents involving offenders known to the victim.

InsideHigherEd has a write-up by Scott Jaschik, here:

On the days that big-time college football teams play, the campus and local police departments of institutions playing see a notable increase in reports of rapes of college-aged women, a new national study has found.

The study, released today by the National Bureau of Economic Research (abstract available here), analyzed data reported by campus and local agencies to the National Incident Based Reporting System, through which the U.S. Justice Department collects and analyzes crime reports. The data are detailed enough that the researchers were able to compare patterns by days of the week so that the football game days were compared to comparable days without games.

The analysis found a 28 percent increase in rape reports by college-age women (defined as 17-24 years old) on days on which Division I-A football teams played. The increase was greater on days of home games (up 41 percent) than away games (15 percent). (The study uses the term Division I-A that has since been replaced by the category Football Bowl Subdivision.)

These figures would translate into an additional 253 to 770 rapes of college-age women each year across the 128 colleges and universities in Division I-A of college football, the study says.

Previous work by some of the same authors, using data from UO, has shown the link between football wins and declining academic performance, particularly for males. The NYT write-up is here, complete with a statistical critique from Duck athletics spokesperson Dave Williford.

Washington Post calls for controls on big-time athletic pork

Columnist Sally Jenkins, here:

… For years, athletic directors have styled themselves as CEO-types and moaned about the difficulties of managing costs. But a Washington Post project published earlier this week shows that these so-called executives are about as fiscally responsible as Gabor sisters serving sevruga in chinchilla capes. The truth is, their deficits aren’t a necessity. They’re a choice.

Throughout The Post’s findings is the distinctly acrid smell of books cooking. The ledgers show that there is never enough money to fully comply with Title IX or cover the true cost of a scholarship but always enough to pay themselves more or to buy a new toy.

… The chair of an engineering department is not permitted to spend indiscriminately, so why should athletic directors be able to — especially when they siphon university money away from other departments to cover their overdrafts?

As matters stand, athletic departments aren’t answerable to anyone, budgeted separately from the university and almost completely unregulated. Their only real oversight comes from high-dollar donors. The reason for this is that years ago college presidents tried to wash their hands by allowing them to become stand-alone entities that raise and spend funds however they wish. Author Gilbert Gaul, in his new book “Billion Dollar Ball,” likens them to hedge funds or entertainment divisions rather than academic entities. As one Texas administrator put it to Gaul, “We eat what we kill.”

But that’s not enough, so they take from the academic side too.

Duck softball stadium gets 32 foot long jumbotron

You can’t make this shit up:

Screen Shot 2015-11-24 at 8.04.38 PM

The cost of this bloated project has gone from $8M to $16M. While the donor has apparently paid for all the construction, this is UO land that will now be off limits for academic use for a long, long time. At a very rough guess, it’s worth $10M. How much did AD Rob Mullens pay for it? His lapel pin says it all: $0 for academics.

And with a jumbotron like that, coach Mike White starts thinking he deserves big money too. $1.425M, to be exact. The RG story on this is here:

Softball ticket revenue is about $10K a year. Before the new raises for the coaches, costs were about $1.4M. The losses are covered from football profits. Why does the Duck Athletics Department get to spend those profits however they like? I don’t know. Back in 2004 the university took a serious look at athletics spending, and concluded that football profits should soon allow athletics to start contributing to the academic side. With deals like this, that will never happen.

Speaking of money losing sports, basketball fans are not exactly flocking to see Dana Altman’s team play in the country’s most expensive college basketball arena:

Screen Shot 2015-11-22 at 3.00.16 PM

Adidas takes on Nike in bid for Eugene School District sports gear

 Nike’s no bid contract with UO is pretty stingy (except of course for the annual $30K clothing allowance for JH insiders). The Eugene public schools drive a tougher bargain. Alisha Roemeling in the RG:

Apparel giants Nike and adidas have found a new arena in which to compete: for the uniforms of high school student athletes in the Eugene School District.

At a Eugene School Board meeting on Wednesday, school district officials announced that adidas has submitted a sponsorship offer and will be competing with Nike for an ­exclusive-rights sports apparel deal for varsity high school athletes.

The two companies’ basic proposals are ­similar, each offering to provide the school ­district with up to $300,000 in product rebates for school uniforms and equipment over the next five years. In ­exchange, varsity athletes at the district’s four high schools would wear the selected company’s uniforms.

But there are also some differences, or sweeteners. Adidas, for example, said it will offer $250 to any of the four schools that wins a league title in an Oregon School Activities Association-sanctioned sport during the life of the agreement. Adidas also offers to kick in $500 to any high school with a team that wins a state title during that time.

The Duck deal?

From Matthew Kish in the Portland Business Journal:

Which football championship team has the worst Nike contract? The Ducks.

Here’s a breakdown of Nike’s [athletic apparel] deal with each university in the playoffs. The terms cover the 2014-15 academic year [reordered in descending order of cash payment]:

– Ohio State: $2.5 million in equipment and apparel and nearly $1.5 million in cash. The university also gets $150,000 in discretionary apparel, typically for athletic department personnel.

– Florida State: $3 million in equipment and apparel and $1.4 million in cash.

– Alabama: $2.8 million in equipment and apparel, $780,000 in cash.

– Oregon: $2.2 million in equipment and apparel and $600,000 in cash. The university also gets $185,000 in discretionary apparel, typically for athletic department personnel.

But hey, we’re #1 in “discretionary apparel”!

From what I can tell from Dave Hubin’s redacted public records, $30K of that goes to our colleagues in Johnson Hall, presumably including some who signed off on the contract. So they’ll be looking good on their Jan 1 Rose Bowl junkets.

Screen Shot 2013-12-31 at 1.05.07 PM

More here.

Ducks to let regular UO students go upstairs at Jock Box

but just this Thursday at 1:00, for a meeting of the Senate’s Intercollegiate Athletics Committee:

Screen Shot 2015-11-17 at 12.33.01 PM

Word is that SSA Director Steve Stolp and his boss Lorraine Davis will address questions about the effectiveness of the Services for Student Athletes operation, which segregates Duck athletes from regular UO students while making the regular students foot the entire $2.4M bill for the athletes.

Only two of the twelve black male athletes UO admitted in 2008 had graduated by 2015. That’s a one-year anomaly, but from what I’ve seen of the data Stolp and Davis are going to have a hard time showing a positive effect, even using some of the NCAA’s specially cooked up measures. More here:

This is an open UO Senate committee meeting, so anyone can attend. Ignore the signs on the stairs saying “Stop: Authorized use only.” Just don’t ask too many questions. The last time UO student reporters started asking questions, AAD Eric Roedl had them kicked out, Dave Hubin made sure they couldn’t use student funds to pay for the public records, UO redacted the shit out of them anyway, and a few years later the administration subverted the IAC with a toothless, secret PAGIA.

Judge Aiken issues order in Duck / Chip Kelly bonus insurance dispute

11/16/2015: Full docket here, full opinion here. I have no idea what it means, except that UO’s lawyers at Harrang, Long, Gary and Rudnick are going to get many more billable hours out of us before this ends:

Screen Shot 2015-11-16 at 10.41.04 PM

2/17/2015: UO sues over Chip Kelly’s bonus insurance policy

The bonuses Rob Mullens and Dana Altman got after letting the accused basketball rapists play in the NCAA tournament are still the big scandal, but it turns out there’s another one. No, not the $20K in NCAA fines that Chip skipped town on:

Mike Tokito has the new story in the Oregonian, here. The docket is here, courtesy of RecaptheLaw.

The University of Oregon is suing a risk management company to recoup $688,000 it paid in bonuses to football coach Chip Kelly and his staff for the 2012-13 season.

University officials believed the bonuses would be covered by an insurance policy the school purchased, but they were not.

The suit names the Illinois-based Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Service and its agent, Monica Drummer, as defendants.

According to the suit, Oregon purchased a Lloyds of London insurance policy through Arthur Gallagher in September 2012. The policy, for which the school paid a $489,940 premium, was supposed to cover bonuses, written into the contracts of Kelly and his staff, that were based on how the Ducks fared during the 2012-13 season. …

Extract from UO’s claim, full doc here:

Screen Shot 2015-02-17 at 6.24.44 PM

Screen Shot 2015-02-17 at 6.28.04 PM

This seems like an extremely expensive policy – even if it had covered what Roedl thought it covered. But hey, why not take it to court and pay HLGR some more money. Out of the academic budget, I’m guessing:

Screen Shot 2015-02-17 at 7.18.26 PM

Stump is well known for his asbestos work:

Screen Shot 2015-02-17 at 8.44.36 PM

Give to the UO, or to the Decade of the Duck?

No, this isn’t from the Duck Athletic Fund’s website, it’s from, the homepage of the UO campaign, which is supposed to be about the academic side of the fund-drive:

Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 7.34.10 PM

To be fair, the other 4 landing pages are about academics. I guess 1 out of 5 ain’t bad. If you follow the link you get to the Duck Athletic Fund brochure, and this:

Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 7.54.58 PM

“As one of only a handful of Division I programs that do not receive state general fund support …”

Now that’s a bold claim. None of the $2.4M the UO Provost’s office pays to run the Jock Box comes from the state’s general fund? I’m no internal auditor, but I’m thinking this claim is a stretch. And under Oregon law, it’s potentially a Class A misdemeanor:

ORS 128.886 False or misleading representations prohibited.

(1) No person shall make any false or misleading representations in the course of any solicitation of contributions.

(2) A representation may be any manifestation of any assertion by words or conduct, including, but not limited to, a failure to disclose a fact.

Duck fundraising expansion raises questions about damage to UO’s academic fund drive

From the recent job postings, it looks like the Ducks are scheduling a major increase in fundraising effort, just as Mike Andreasen’s UO Advancement Office finally gets its academic fundraising efforts rolling. This is really bad timing. This is the time when the Duck fundraisers should be directed to shift their efforts to the academic cause. Fundriasing effort could have been easier with fundraising software which could make it eaiser to deal with donations and other items.

The evidence is that athletic donations crowd out donations to academics. UO Professor Dennis Howard – holder of a Nike Philip H. Knight Chair in Sports Marketing at UO and former LCB Business School Dean – has written an excellent paper on exactly this topic, comparing data on donations to Duck athletics and to UO academics:

Both alumni and non-alumni show an increasing preference toward directing their gifts to the intercollegiate athletics department-at the expense of the donations to academic programs. Sperber’s (2000) assertion that giving to athletics undermines academic giving is strongly supported.


For every $100 of new revenue raised from major donors by the University of Oregon, over 80% is being directed to the athletic department. Even with the large increases in numbers of total donors since 1994, academic giving struggles to remain stable while donations to athletics experience huge growth. In three out of the past five years (1998, 2000, 2001), the total dollars donated to academics by non-alumni has fallen despite annual increases in the number of non-alumni donors. Total dollars donated to academics by alumni fell in only one year (2000), again despite an increase in the total number of donors. This suggests new donors are not making academic gifts, and current donors are shifting dollars from academic giving to donations directed to the athletic program. Additionally, as discussed above, proportional giving by alumni is predominantly directed to the athletic program. If these trends continue, total academic giving will fall for both alumni and non-alumni despite continued increases in the total numbers of both types of donors.

Stefan Verbano had a great story on Howard and his work a few years back, in the Emerald here:

The 2004 study concluded that even non-alumni are more likely to donate to athletics in the wake of successful sports seasons, redirecting much-needed funds away from flagging academic resources.

If you don’t like statistics, there are plenty of anecdotes floating around about Duck fundraisers swooping in to make asks just before the academic side’s advancement people had planned on one. I’ve even heard that while the Duck fundraisers have access to the academic side’s prospect management system, the Ducks maintain their own data on their donors, which they won’t share with the academic fundraisers.

And of course Rob Mullens has repeatedly rejected proposals that alumni should be able to get the same preference for good football tickets from making academic donations as they get from giving to the Duck Athletic Fund.

One way to encourage cooperation between the Duck fundraisers and the Academic side’s Office of Advancement would be to give the Duck fundraisers targets for academic donations as well as athletic donations, and enforce this by having the Duck fundraisers have a dual report to VP for Advancement Mike Andreassen, not just to the Duck Athletic Fund Director. That is so not happening with the latest athletic development hires:

Associate Director Of Development, Eugene & Central Oregon, Athletics,


Senior Associate Director of Development, Eugene & Northern California, Athletics


Serve as representative of UO Athletics and the Duck Athletic Fund in Eugene and Northern California. Manage a Major Gift portfolio. Responsible for development activities as a member of the Duck Athletic Fund for both annual gifts to the Duck Athletic Fund and major gifts to endowments and capital projects. [UOM: no sign this includes academic gifts.] Assist in marketing and ticket sales efforts in assigned regions.

This position will be expected to serve as the departmental liaison to assigned booster groups, provide solid stewardship to current athletic donors and play a large role in major gift fundraising efforts.

Responsible for promoting the philosophy and objectives of the intercollegiate athletics program, [UOM: Not the UO?] including adherence to all department policies and procedures, as well as the rules and regulations of the university, Pac-12 Conference and the NCAA.

Act as a major gift fundraiser, identify, cultivate and solicit major gifts.

Develop and implement a comprehensive prospecting plan for university alumni, with an emphasis on alumni living in Oregon who are potential high-end annual ($2,500+) and major gift ($100K+) prospects using tools provided by the Office of Prospect Management and Analytics.

Aggressively identify and formally qualify new prospects and existing donors through personal visits, phone calls, correspondence, events and university activities to meet fundraising objectives.

Manage a portfolio of primarily new/discovery prospects, seeking to grow the pool of engaged alumni, parents, friends and corporate supporters.

Create written proposals and case statements for solicitation of individuals and organizations. Coordinate clearance with other development officers and administrators.

Conduct stewardship, including gift acknowledgements/thank you correspondence, recognition, communications and special events.

Collaborate with development staff, faculty, program directors, other university administrators, and volunteers to identify, qualify, cultivate and solicit prospective donors.

Identify, cultivate and solicit major gifts.

A. Regularly meet and communicate with potential donors.

B. Rank and prioritize potential donors.

C. Listen to passions of potential donors, further engage them.

D. Collaborate with athletic and campus colleagues to strategize, then solicit potential donors for gifts.

E. Thank donors promptly and continue appropriate stewardship of them.

Serve as athletic department officer for Eugene and Northern California. Assist with marketing, public relations, and ticket sales efforts in assigned regions. Regularly communicate and meet with donors and prospective donors to Oregon Athletics. Meet annual goals of attracting an increasing number of gifts to the Duck Athletic Fund. Establish and maintain relationships to increase donation levels, season tickets, and corporate marketing opportunities. [UOM: No annual goals for cooperating with UO Advancement’s academic fund drive.] Help ensure effective communication among development staff.

Performs special duties and projects as requested by the Assistant Athletic Director for DAF & Ticket Operations.

UO won’t release auditor’s instructions for upcoming athletics audit

9/17/2015: Move it along professor, nothing to see here. Really?

From: “Thornton, Lisa” <> Subject: Public Records Request 2016-PRR-078
Date: September 17, 2015 at 11:04:14 AM PDT


Dear Mr. Harbaugh-

Records responsive to your request made 9/15/2015 [for a copy of the instructions to the auditor showing what he will examine, etc.] are exempt from disclosure under ORS 192.501 (37).  However, the university has chosen to provide you with the preliminary objectives of the upcoming athletics risk assessmentt, which you can find below.

The Objectives

•  To gain an understanding of the athletics program in order to identify inherent risks.

•  Identify systems and processes along with related controls that are intended to mitigate these risks.

•  The results of this work will be used to develop a multiple year, risk based audit plan. 

The office considers this to be fully responsive to your request, and will now close your matter. Thank you for contacting the office with your request.

Sincerely, Lisa Thornton, Office of Public Records

The DOJ’s Public Records Manual says, regarding ORS 192.501 (37):

Enacted in 2011, this exemption allows, but does not require, public bodies to decline to disclose documents and information related to audits of the public body (or audits the public body is conducting with respect to other public bodies) while the audit is ongoing. In order to qualify for this exemption, the auditor or audit organization must be operating under “nationally recognized government auditing standards,” and the audit must still be ongoing. An audit is ongoing when it has not been abandoned, and the final audit report in accordance with nationally recognized government auditing standards has not been issued. Note that this exemption expressly states that it “does not prohibit disclosure of a draft audit report that is provided to the audited entity for the entity’s response to the audit findings.”

9/10/2015: Page down for latest email from UO auditor Brenda Muirhead.

5/20/2015: Audit of athletic dept risks due this fall – and another cut to Duck subsidies?

The last audit cut the subsidy for the Ducks by $555,227, recurring. How much will this one save?

Continue reading

UO’s federal research funding barely tops Duck spending, after their subsidies

9/14/2015: UO announces $115M in research funding for 2014-15

Interim VP for Research Brad Shelton’s office has just released the 14-15 fact sheet here. $103.5M in federal grants:

The University of Oregon has more than doubled its research funding over the last twenty years to a total of $114.6 million in sponsored projects during the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2015. Buoyed by an uptick in federal awards, the university saw gains in its overall sponsored research funding and continued high proposal counts in 2014-2015.

Meanwhile Duck athletic spending for the 14-15 FY was projected at $98.4M. That official number excludes the $465K that Frohnmayer and Kilkenny stuck the academic side with for the cost of the Matt Court Arena land, and the $375K plus that they now make academics pay for the Presidential Skybox, and a large portion of the bonds for the Matt Court underground parking garage that the city of Eugene made UO build as a condition for allowing the arena development. These are born by regular UO parking permit holders instead of the athletics department. Then there’s the $2.1M for running the Jock Box, all paid by the academic side. Add that all up and you’ve got athletic spending of $101.5M for last year. I’m sure I’ve missed a few things, – maybe UO auditor Brenda Muirhead will find them with her new audit?

Interestingly, the original Matt Court Arena budget plan, as approved by the Senate Budget Committee’s Arena subcommittee, assumed that the Ducks would now be paying the academic side $450K for academic support services, out a total cost of $600K or so. That didn’t happen. Instead UO built the new Jock Box, which costs about $2.1M to run, and somehow the cost was switched from athletics to the Provost’s academic budget. Athletics has been paying $0. (See the “Academic Learning Center” revenue lines, in parens to indicate expenses. AD Rob Mullens and AAD for finance Eric Roedl now posts all these spreadsheets and MOU’s on, thanks to a few public records petitions I made to the Oregon DOJ and an audit by the Oregon Secretary of State. His files show the numbers for 14-15 as well, but the formatting is difficult so I’m just showing them through 13-14.)

So how did the academic side get stuck with that $2.1M for the Jock Box? I don’t know. No one even knew it was happening until Jamie Moffitt let it slip out, and Greg Bolt published it in the RG in May 2011. This is the first time I’ve noticed that UO once had a plan to shift the cost of tutoring athletes to the athletic department.

Former Provost Jim Bean claimed he had an MOU saying academics now had to pay, but he would never produce it. Here’s the 2010 Arena Budget plan, followed by the actual numbers as of August 2015. The athletic legacy fund balance now exceeds the 2010 prediction by about $6M – so maybe it’s time to revisit some of these Duck subsidies?

The updated 2010 Arena plan:

Screen Shot 2015-09-14 at 9.12.59 PM


The reality:

Screen Shot 2015-09-14 at 9.14.41 PM

9/8/2015: University announces record $308M in research funding for 2014-15

That would be Oregon State University, for the year ending June 30, 2015. Press release and links to data here. Thanks to a proud Beaver fan for the link:

CORVALLIS, Ore. — Oregon State University research funding reached $308.9 million, its highest level ever, in the fiscal year that ended on June 30. A near doubling of revenues from licensing patented technologies and an 8.5 percent increase in competitive federal funding fueled OSU research on a range of projects including advanced ocean-going research vessels, the health impacts of pollution and sustainable materials for high-speed computing.

UO hasn’t released our new numbers yet, the old report is here. When it is updated I’ll add the last 2 years to the “Civil War that matters” chart.

The figure on the left shows “Federal Flow Through” totals, which are the easiest to find directly comparable data. They include spending on outreach and instruction, but it’s mostly research money and the trends look similar no matter how you cut it. The figure on the right shows athletic department spending, from USAToday. (Official UO and OSU numbers for 2012.)

I know more recent data is now available. Reported Duck athletic spending has increased to $98.4M for 2014-15. I don’t have the stomach just now to track down the rest and enter it.

For more recent evidence on how UO is trying to divert money from academics to athletics, read the blockbuster report in the Register Guard about secret funding for UO’s failed 2019 International Track Championship bid. Link here.

Ducks to pay Georgia State $900K for Sept 19th body-bag game

9/12/2015: Andy Greif has the game preview in the Oregonian here – though not the financial details. Maybe UO still hasn’t responded to that public records request.

Last year GSU won 1 out of 12 football games, and brought in just $654,347 from ticket sales for football and basketball combined. So their athletic director and coach need the Ducks’ $900K  contract payment to make payday for their players themselves. GSU Coach Trent Miles’s salary is $510K, and after airfare for the team he should have that covered.

And Duck AD Rob Mullens is perfectly willing to pay Miles $900K for a blowout win. It doesn’t quite seem sporting, but that’s big-time college sports.

It also seems well above the going rate:

9/4/2015: Ducks pay EWU $450K for “body-bag” game, President Schill pays Ducks $375K for skybox seats

The contract between Rob Mullens and Bill Chaves is here. UO sat on the public records request for weeks, but EWU emailed it to me in a few days:

Screen Shot 2015-03-13 at 5.00.42 PM

Screen Shot 2015-09-04 at 11.48.00 AM

And here’s the agreement between Johnson Hall and Athletics, to divert academic money towards the “presidential skybox” at Autzen, etc. That’s right, UO students pay for the president’s football skybox. It took a petition to the Oregon DOJ to pry this document out of UO, but now it is posted on the goducks website here:

Screen Shot 2015-02-06 at 1.09.45 PM

Screen Shot 2015-02-06 at 1.09.58 PM

And here we’ve got athletics bitching that they haven’t got rent check yet:

Screen Shot 2015-02-06 at 12.45.37 PM


Huskies boast their subsidies are smaller than Rob Mullens’s

But Mullens claims the Ducks get no subsidies. At least they’re arguing over the right thing. Someday the PAC-12 ADs may even start doing something to help out their universities with that new TV revenue.

Just kidding, we know they’ll spend it all on raises for themselves. Adam Jude has the story in the Seattle Times, here.

Speaking of subsidies, rumor has it that I finally raised enough stink about Rob Mullens hijacking the $5M Robin Jaqua gift. He’s returned it to the academic side, which means we save $200,000 a year on the $2.2M cost of subsidizing the Jock Box athlete-only tutoring. Baby steps, but I hope this is true. We’ll know more when the UO Senate revisits the anti-subsidy motions this fall.

IAAF sells 2021 Track Championships to Eugene w/o public bidding

Update: UO’s public records office has been sitting on the RG’s request for documents about the championship bidding process since June 15. PR log here:

Screen Shot 2015-08-02 at 4.08.21 PM

4/16/2015 update: IAAF sells 2021 Track Championships to Eugene w/o public bidding

The BBC has the surprising news here:

The 2021 World Athletics Championships will be held in Eugene, Oregon, after the sport’s governing body bypassed the normal bidding process. The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) said it was “a unique strategic opportunity” to hold the event in the United States for the first time. IAAF chief Lamine Diack said the decision was taken “in the interest of the global development of our sport”.

How much public money did the UO Foundation, Eugene, and the State secretly promise this time? I don’t know, but I expect there will be some reporters digging into this latest from the scandal ridden IAAF.

1/31/2015 update: UO Public Records office finally gives RG IAAF track bid documents – but what did the Presidential Archives show?

I’ll go out on a limb and guess that Dave Hubin’s office carefully scrubbed these records before deciding what to hand over to RG News Editor Christian Wihtol. Presumably the good stuff is in UO’s Presidential Archives though – or was, until Interim GC Doug Park got his hands on them:

Screen Shot 2015-01-31 at 12.25.15 PM

11/25/2014: Paul Weinhold was planning to mortgage UO for Track-Town’s losing IAAF bid

This latest athletics scandal is not going to help UO hire a new President – at least not the sort we need. Diane Dietz’s blockbuster story (in the RegisterGuard tomorrow, online tonight) seems to have made UO Foundation President Paul Weinhold very nervous:

The foundation’s financial guarantee to the IAAF set no upper limit on what the foundation would have been liable for if the Eugene event had turned into a money loser. …

Weinhold said the UO Foundation faced minimal risk in agreeing to cover meet losses because TrackTown USA’s budget was thoroughly vetted and reliable [Editor: Like the Knight Arena budget?]; Kitzhaber favored the legislation that would have provided millions in state support; and the foundation had confidential side deals meant to hold the foundation harmless, Weinhold said in the interview. Weinhold declined to disclose any specifics of those side deals.

“We do not believe we had any exposure, and we had agreements in place that eliminated our exposure. That should be enough for you,” he said.

He should be nervous, given Oregon’s public meetings law, and what he says about the role of the UO Board, which is subject to that law:

Weinhold said the foundation made sure the UO leadership was informed of financial guarantees being made to the IAAF.

“There was full knowledge from the (UO) board to the (UO) president of exactly what we were doing — providing this guarantee,” Weinhold said.

Weinhold said the foundation’s plan was not presented to the Board of Trustees as a whole, but rather in conversations with individuals.

“There was a review with various people at different times — the board leadership with the president with others involved.”

The Board of Trustees didn’t object, but that did not mean that the foundation had an implied approval from the board for the venture, Weinhold said.

“I didn’t say it was implied permission. We didn’t ever talk about permission. We talked about the vision, the benefit to the University of Oregon.”

And then:

“The foundation served this same role with the World Juniors this past summer,” Weinhold told the international body, “and is serving this role with the World Indoor Championships in Portland in 2016.”

The foundation describes its public mission to the Internal Revenue Service — which grants the foundation’s nonprofit status — as “supporting the University of Oregon’s mission of education, research and entrepreneurship…”

Weinhold initially said this week that the Portland meet — not at the UO and not a UO event — was a little far afield.

“That doesn’t help the university in much of any way,” he said. Then he added, “Let me back up. It doesn’t help the university in the way that the World Juniors did, or the World Championship (would have), but it was all part of a three-part series to host the World Championships.”

The foundation believed it would have a better chance of clinching the world championships if it agreed to guarantee all three events, Weinhold said.

The foundation made sure it wouldn’t violate IRS rules by backing the track event, he said. “This was reviewed by our legal counsel and our auditors,” he said.

But after 2016, the foundation has no plans to continue to be a guarantor — “not unless there’s some benefit to the University of Oregon,” Weinhold said. …

Perhaps Eugene lost because we didn’t offer IAAF President Lamine Diack a large enough bribe? I’m guessing the Foundation will try again for 2021, with still more of our money, and even less transparency.  Full disclosure: Last year the UO Foundation threatened to sue me for defamation, for posting that they were “Money laundering for the Duck Athletic Fund”. I really don’t know what to say about this latest, except to say that Milton Friedman was right about “spending other people’s money”.

UO Board Secretary Angela Wilhelm kicked Dietz and me out of the UO Board meeting about this proposal. So say what you will about the corrupt IAAF – at least they posted the video. Vin Lananna, Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown, Paul Weinhold, and others trying to spend UO’s money. The whole sad thing is worth watching, but I’ve set this to start with Kitzhaber promising to chip in $20 from every Oregon taxpayer (yep, Beavers too), to help out UO’s very high-maintenance Uncle Phil:

8/2/2015 update: More trouble for the notoriously corrupt IAAF, which will be bringing its championship to Eugene in 2021 thanks to a promised subsidy of $30M in Oregon tax money from John Kitzhaber (after he got a $250K campaign gift from Phil Knight) and an open ended promise of UO Foundation support from Paul Weinhold. Page down for the video. The NYT has the drug story here:

KUALA LUMPUR — Endurance runners suspected of doping have been winning a third of Olympic and world championship medals, two news organizations said on Sunday, after a leak of thousands of blood test results from 2001-2012 threw global athletics into chaos.

Britain’s Sunday Times newspaper and Germany’s ARD/WDR broadcaster said they had obtained the secret data from the vaults of the global athletics governing body, the IAAF, supplied by a whistleblower disgusted by the extent of doping.

The news organizations showed the data to two experts, who concluded distance running was in the same state as cycling had been when Lance Armstrong won the seven Tour de France victories of which he has since been stripped.

“Never have I seen such an alarmingly abnormal set of blood values,” the Sunday Times quoted Australian doping expert Robin Parisotto, one of the two scientists, as saying.

“So many athletes appear to have doped with impunity, and it is damning that the IAAF appears to have sat idly by and let this happen,” said Parisotto, an inventor of the test used to detect the blood doping agent EPO. …

Heavily subsidized Duck coach has 10 year plan to break even

No, of course I’m not talking about basketball coach Dana Altman – he’s a lost cause. I’m talking about women’s volleyball coach Jim Moore. RG columnist Austin Meek has the story here:

On paper, Moore acknowledged, the task looks daunting. According to financial documents filed with the U.S. Department of Education, Oregon’s volleyball program generated $387,000 in revenue and $1.6 million in expenses for 2013-14.

This program does give out 13 full-ride scholarships, apparently almost all to out of state-students. Let’s see, he’s losing $1.3M per year, so each scholarship costs UO $100,000. So we could eliminate volleyball and give out 50 full-ride scholarships to Oregon residents selected on the basis of academic merit or need. We’d have to drop a men’s sport too of course, because of Title IX. How about baseball? That would be another 150 scholarships, easy.

Meanwhile Altman is losing about $3M a year, or 120 merit/need scholarships. And that doesn’t count the Knight Arena bond payments.

I had to file a few public records petitions with the Oregon Department of Justice to make it happen, but Rob Mullens and the Athletic Department are now very transparent about finances – coach contracts here, NCAA docs and once secret MOU’s here:

Screen Shot 2015-07-26 at 5.10.03 PM
Screen Shot 2015-07-26 at 5.07.21 PM