Summary

• Need to work toward detailed goals and priorities
  • Frech, Seibert, and Trenary to begin work on Working Vision draft
• Trenary to discuss use of contacts with Schiller
• Researching Athletics contacts and field hours per week are possible homework items

Further meeting detail

Present

• Jake Bodner
• Kevin Cunningham
• Wes Farrow
• Jamie Frech
• Jeff Hagan
• John Moore
• Vanessa Rojano
• Karl Seibert
• Ben Shapiro
• Andrew Swain
• Matt Trenary
• Aaron Turk
• Tom Warburton
• James Wilber

Detailed notes

• Met with Rec Sports development team
  • Summary
    • Positive and encouraging
      • Plenty of evidence that our efforts to improve this relationship are working
    • Weren’t concerned with inclusion of varsity pursuit but suggested to focus on short-term priorities first
    • Support us using our connections which may be better than theirs
    • Open to meeting Working Group and Trenary will schedule
    • Elbel discussions are delayed as Covid has delayed their main facility priority, the new CCRB
  • Takeaway: We need to develop detailed goals and priorities
• Cunningham: What’s the team’s current status during Covid?
  • All Club Sports must apply to return to action
  • No competitions happening this fall but are hoping for practices with balls
• Frech: Any discussion of field locations?
  • Have only mentioned Elbel though past discussions make all Rec Sports fields seem available
• Seibert: What does Rec Sports want from us?
  • Trenary:
    • A plan with priorities, milestones, etc.
    • Can’t engage donors if there aren’t immediate priorities
    • Long-term objectives can be on the “menu” in case conversations head that way
    • Small amounts of money (e.g. $500) intended for a large project (e.g. a field) can be tracked. Large amounts (e.g. $100k) may necessitate a separate fund.
• Wilber: What’s the Rec Sports development team’s scope?
  • Rec Sports. They will not provide hours, data, or expertise for an off-campus facility or something in Athletics.
• Cunningham: Would Rec Sports provide any financial support toward a campaign?
  • Trenary:
    • Don’t expect much if any
    • They would support a project that benefits other sports
      • Cunningham: Would be a hard sell to find significant rugby support for a facility with lots of other teams getting free rides
• Wilber: City fields across from Mitchell. Is there possibility of working toward something with the city’s sports commission?
  • Trenary:
    • I really don’t know
    • Third option here is a field in Athletics. They are the only department that supports sport-specific facilities.
• Frech: What priorities does what percentage of a project’s goal get us?
  • Trenary:
    • Only one discussion with Mike Widen (Director of Rec Sports) and Lisa Shea (Associate Director)
    • Brief mention of raising half of the project to get priority practice times but nothing set at all
• Seibert: Should we reach out to our contacts now? Could be good to get feedback on raw, unfinished vision here.
  • Trenary will discuss with Schiller
  • Frech:
    • Previous conversations with NIRA, the NCAA women’s rugby group
      • Wilber: Are some teams trying to progress administratively in preparation of varsity pursuit?
        • Frech: Some small schools have, but not many large schools where that jump is less likely
    • They suggested finding the right connection with Athletics is important
    • Also mentioned need for the right pitch, which currently isn’t evident when U-M is in Title IX compliance
  • Trenary: John Paul, former men’s lacrosse coach, is another possible contact
  • Wilber: Some past connections with women’s lacrosse team
• Turk: Have we had any conversations with Athletics? Do we need to refine vision or can we start now?
  • Trenary: No talks yet, was planning on waiting until we had a working vision
  • Frech:
    • NIRA suggested having the right contacts and pitch first
      • Diversity recruitment might matter as an incentive to Athletics?
    • Maybe we can start doing some homework now?
  • Athletics probably busy with Covid and more likely to cut teams than entertain meetings from non-Athletics teams
• Warburton: If Rec Sports is looking for clear plan, what are we prioritizing?
  • Trenary:
    • Need to decide but the short list is admissions, full-time trainer, full-time coaching. Maybe some travel/operations items.
    • Bodner is working on long-term budget to build back to short-term priorities
  • Seibert:
    • Admissions has been identified as the biggest separator between good and bad teams
      • Trenary: Doesn’t cost money so could pursue and prioritize other fundraising goals
    • Big question is, why is now the right time?
      • Frech: Is the U losing enrollment?
        • Trenary: No
        • Moore: But there is a national trend working against higher ed
        • Trenary: In-state applicants are definitely in decline
        • Farrow: Maybe in-roads with urban Detroit schools could help?
          • Trenary: Mike Brooks of SAC is helping work on a partnership between the team and Detroit Loyola high school team
      • Trenary: Part of the reason for now is the shifting landscape of collegiate rugby into haves and have nots
• Trenary: What details do we need to know about a field before we can include in our working vision?
  • Wilber:
    • Hours per week of footfall is an important consideration for cost
    • Other functions (e.g., seating and press box) play into cost
    • $1.5m to $15m is generally the range here
  • Shapiro: Main detail is control. Would we have a formal agreement?
    • Trenary: We won’t know by the time we have a working vision but absolutely would get a formal agreement no matter what avenue we pursue.
• Trenary: Next steps
  • Arrange meeting between working group and Club Sports
  • Start draft of working vision to get detailed about our goals and timeline
    • This should help clarify some pieces we’ve discussed such as the field and the men’s and women’s collaboration