Summary

• Our Working Vision is final. Rec Sports feedback doesn’t change it.
• We’ll work with Rec Sports on short-term development needs
• We’ll ask Rec Sports about how best to manage remainder of our vision

Further meeting detail

Present

• Tianna Kilgore
• James Wilber
• Tom Warburton
• George Janke
• Tom Warburton
• Jamie Frech
• Sam Taylordean
• Kevin Cunningham
• Andrew Swain
• Ben Shapiro
• Jacob Bodner
• Vanessa Rojano
• Karl Seibert
• John Palladino
• Nate Fisher
• Matt Trenary

Detailed notes

• Trenary: Issue at hand: How best to keep the entirely of our vision while also utilizing Rec Sports help
  • Swain: Doesn’t see a reason not to use Rec Sports help
  • Wilber: Full vision will take long-term management, like handling major donors
• Swain: Is there a model for Rec Sports + Athletics?
  • Trenary: Lacrosse is closest but the men took the existing team and disregarded club setup
• Frech: The vision is the vision. This doesn’t change that
  • Trenary: Agree
  • Warburton: Are there issues with including things when they’re not guaranteed? Don’t want to mislead.
    • Trenary: Likely why Rec Sports doesn’t want Elbel included specifically
    • Karl: They want a well-funded club that’s the same as now. So we should be careful including other stuff that doesn’t fit.
    • Wilber: Need some role definition. Could get pulled different ways.
• Trenary: So continue with short-term target of trainers/endowment?
  • Wilber: If trainers are obtained and are off the list, do we lose the story?
    • Trenary: To me it shows progress.
      • Bodner: But do we hit the end of the road with RS? And then need to go private, etc.
  • Swain: Is there really anything stopping us from going in parallel right now right?
    • Seibert: But Rec Sports presents their world, not ours. Could this leave potential high-donor amounts on the table? Or at worse, conflict?
      • Seibert: Do we have an idea of money amount?
        • Trenary: Mention of 6 to 7 to 8 figure donors
    • Cunningham: We need to be careful. Lots of politics here.
    • Wilber: 2021 trainers through Rec Sports could better inform our decisions for years 2-5
    • Karl: Similar setup with WCBN a few years ago. Uncovered a $50k unaffiliated donor who just liked college radio.
      • Trenary: Have heard of discovering unknown yet significant donors at ND
• Cunningham: The vision is good, don’t compromise! But need somone on the inside.
  • Frech: Yep, Rec Sports wants to make us fit in their box. Don’t compromise.
    • Trenary: Spoke to David Canter today. Was impressed and figured Athletics was where things would blossom.
  • Cunningham: The lack of university-employed coaching is already an area where we’re butting heads
  • Seibert: Other possible inside connections?
    • Wilber: Other programs contacts back to Michigan?
      • Trenary: Still missing Athletics contact
    • Jamie: More granular detail on lacrosse path? Money, timeline, etc.
• Trenary: So what’s the path here
  • Seibert:
    • Segment the conversations
      • Let Rec Sports talk to people we have no relationship with. Let Development do their work.
      • We talk to who we know
  • Swain: Cultivate the “passion players”. Doesn’t have to be one or the other.
  • Wilber:
    • How to tell our story. How the vision will come to life in 2021. Digital presence, etc.
    • How we deliberately mine 10-year development relationships.
    • Don’t want to circulate multiple visions. But can grow these conversations/relationships.
  • Seibert: For a Rec Sports version, what parts can be long-term there? Why are we asking for so much if the big parts are out?
    • Warburton: Could give Rec Sports MR25 or something, and we grow MR30 for longer-term stuff.
    • Frech: I like it. Next steps are piloting or segmenting as Karl said.
• Frech: It’s the same Rec Sports process with the women. Should we align stuff now?
  • Trenary: I think so.
  • Frech: Good time to start up conversations with RS.
    • Tiana: Endowment finalization.
• Karl: Yeah, MR25/30. Could really be 1 or 2 people is the difference between the realization of the visions.
• Palladino: Full steam ahead with what Rec Sports can give us. No where to go but up.
  • Have to be disciplined to stay true to the long-term vision.
  • 2021, have some things to go for. But break out for all the other stuff.
  • Start Athletics relationship on good foot. But no reason to throttle back.
• Taylordean: Rec Sports will give us access with people we don’t know. So why not?
• Wilber: MRF fit
  • Trenary: MRF expanding board and is primed to take on some of these initiatives
• Trenary: Summary:
  • Vision doesn’t change
  • We’ll talk to Rec Sports about segmentation and how to maintain our full vision
  • Seibert: Drafting sanitized version for Rec Sports is a next step