I wrote to him basically telling him Good Luck w/ the Brohm situation and do your best to keep him at Purdue. He thanked me for the note and responded that we are totally committed to Coach Brohm and that Coach knows that and appreciates that. Mike also said thanks for having committed fans. I wrote to him last tuesday and wasn't really expecting a reply, but he always does (5th time). Glad we have him. Not really ground breaking news but thought I'd share.
MBOB responded again
- Thread starter PaBoiler78
- Start date
I e-mailed Morgan years ago. Same thing, he did respond and the discussion was Stadium lights. Yadda Yadda Yadda TV coverage pays for it. Not necessary, but thank you for the input.
I've seen 3 games this year on TV and I will say the Stadium lights from last years install look great and guess what. It becomes easier for the networks to schedule Purdue for night games + there are more butts in the seats for Saturday night main event games. Kirk Herbstreit was impressed with the dancing lightshow after tOSU game once he knew what was going on. A+ for MBOB and staff for lights and creativity to have them sequence to a lightshow as needed.
F for Morgan Burke to not recognize that and be stubborn about it as well.
Odds are that its an assistant replying. I have worked with some people with much less high profile university jobs that literally get hundreds of emails a day and they don't check their inbox themselves. Important senders have auto-selection filters, and an assistant either responds to basic questions or routes the email to a "to-read" folder if its deemed important.
The lights are indeed a great addition and emblematic of Bobinski's leadership and vision for the football program and the athletic department.
I've written emails to both Mike Bobinski and Burke and I know that they both replied to me themselves because of what they said in the reply. Mike Bobinski is a top-notch AD and Purdue is fortunate to have him. He cares. Despite what many say/have said about Burke on here, he loves Purdue and did what he thought was best for the AD and the school at the time. I like Morgan as a person and am elated with the job Mike has done so far.
Despite my opinion of Morgue’s handling of the football program, I have multiple friends who have been around him for extended periods of time, and they all say he’s a very nice man. And I know he loves Purdue.
c'mon, folks. Still with this?
Morgan didn't write checks. It started and ended with the BoT and President.
With that reply, the only thing Burke was guilty of was toeing the company line.
Jishke not as much but Cordova yes, absolutely. She paid lip service to Purdue athletics and then drained funds from the AD to pay for her pet projects and extra staff.
Agree to a point. Burke ran the AD with an eye on the bottom line at all times. Sometimes he was overly stingy and didn’t appreciate the value of a strong FB program to the perception of the school. It didn’t help when Cordova swiped $M from the AD to pay for her pet projects and special staff.
That was not the case for Morgan Burke based on his response. It was him. He asked I do not share what he said (which I will not) but it generally supports the position his hands were tied on certain things. I don't think it is fair to say he was focused on the bottom line, I think that is what Mitch Daniels focuses on and he sees the value investments have to the bottom line as new revenue was swept away. I believe he was forced to look at the expense line and not the bottom line (at least with Cordova).
Yes, he did, but on the "stingy" part you have nothing but conjecture.
All things go through the President to the BoT before approval and funding.
You would have to know what he asked for vs. what he was given to work with. That, we don't know.
I'm not denying that Morgan wasn't loyal to Purdue. At some point you have Manage and put together a Project Plan with R.O.I. and push like hell thru BoT and President. They may not like it, but would understand if the justification was there. Taking the weight off the Networks to have to rent and bring in Telescoping lighted trucks is a no brainer to get late afternoon and evening games which will add more butts to the stands vs. a Saturday Noon kickoff when people have kids events and business issues to address.
No doubt having a Quality coach and staff makes the overall product entertaining & worthwhile more than anything else, but having late afternoon (3 pm) and evening (7 pm) starts allow for more attendance.
I don't disagree. And, I get that people want to hang him in the public square. I also get that he was target #1 for those who have no idea how decisions are made.
But, when you're dealing with a "gatekeeper" (Cordova) to the people controlling the purse strings, you're not in control. It's that simple.
daniels is notoriously stingy too, and stated the same when coming to purdue
and bergoff (said to be a driving force on the Bot) was here since 2009.
who/what spurred them to make a change, and start spending much bigger $ to compete?
Whoa, was that ever contemplated... by anyone? I don't know what that would cost but I know you cannot go down to the local Home Depot and rent them. I would suspect it would cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars per game to do that. Is it really a no brainer for Purdue to pay that? How many more butts do you get in the stands? Even with all the excitement and probably a five figure number of fans showing up for Wisconsin, that was our least attended game. And I don't buy an argument for the weather since the Eastern Michigan game (noon start) was much worse.
If you throw away the Michigan, and OSU games as they are outliers and probably would be night games anyways with the networks paying, here are the breakdown of attendance the past two years based on time:
Noon - 4 games (IL & IN in 2017, EMU & Mizzou in 2018) - 48,474
3:30/4:00 - 3 games (MN in 2017, WI,, & Iowa in 2018) - 49,638
Night Games - 4 games (OH, NE in 2017 & BC, NU in 2018) - 45,393
The noon starts have actually had more folks at the games than the average afternoon/night game. Even if you add in OSU and UM average that is only 2,000 more fans per game. And Hazel's first year we averaged 49,000 per game.
I don't see any positive return on investment by putting temporary lights up for a 3:30 or night start. From a business perspective you either put in permanent lights or you let the networks pay for temporary lights. I think ultimately we made the right decision, but I don't think that was ever on the table. Keep in mind, at least one previous administration commented they liked the noon starts since it would curtail heavier drinking and additional security costs, so there was never a desire to go for the later starts.
Daniels is not stingy. He runs everything like a business. He knew the bigger $ would bring in a good return (and it likely has). There is a difference between making decisions based on a ROI and stingy.
true, not the best adjective.
but was daniels far from cordova in initial intent though? many hated her taking a dollar earned from athletics and putting it toward academics.
daniels in 2016, regarding tv revenue:
"So the impending major increase is a big moment. But not necessarily a purely positive one because, if every penny of this new revenue is poured into athletics, it will simply fuel the next round of an arms race that is already out of control.
On one hand, the new infusion will enable many schools to end their subsidies and onerous student fees and retain general revenues for academic purposes. And, within limits, it will enable our university to compete more evenly with schools who assign athletics an even higher priority than we might think appropriate.
If the new contracts eventuate as expected, I will speak in favor of a conference-wide approach that commits a meaningful share of incremental media dollars to the academic missions of our universities. "
Last edited:
That is a comment on the universal state of spending on collegiate athletics. Purdue was always fiscally conservative with athletics. Mitch is not talking about going out and starting up a new sports or building a hockey arena like Penn State. I don’t think that changes anything he saying don’t give somebody who’s already living beyond their means more money to spend frivolously. What he did instead was invest in a football facility and lights to get on par with the rest of the big 10 or at least the middle of the pack. I think he was concerned the other schools will just continue to throw more money at sports with no ROI that we would just be chasing.
I never implied for Purdue to rent. I wanted Purdue to buy the lights as in installating them permanent thru capital investment project like they did. BTW, when they announced the project. I made a target donation to that project and returned to an afternoon game to see the lights in action. A good investment. Having those lights allow for many more late afternoon and evening games which puts Purdue on TV to larger audiences. It becomes an easier scheduling event for the Networks to not have to pony up the money for those special trucks and generators running them. We both can agree that the value of having lights leads to accessing a more broad market thru the networks and prime time audiences.
