DAILY LOBO new mexico
But those bangs
tuesday
see Page 4
April 2, 2013
The Independent Student Voice of UNM since 1895
Reaction to Alford mixed ‘Coaching changes happen. They’re inevitable.’ by Ardee Napolitano news@dailylobo.com
When the news broke that men’s basketball head coach Steve Alford was leaving UNM to accept a coaching job at UCLA, many thought it was an April Fools’ joke. But as the realness of the situation has become clear, it seems University community has mixed feelings about the departure. UNM President Robert Frank said that despite Alford’s departure, he is sure the team will continue to perform well. He said the University will do whatever it can to maintain the quality of the team. “We have an incredible group of players and recruits, and our priority is to preserve the momentum of the program,” he said in a statement. “I feel confident that we will find a replacement who will continue to build on our tradition of excellence and move Lobo basketball to the next level of elite competition.” On Saturday, ESPN broke the news that Alford accepted an offer with UCLA after signing an agreement to a new 10-year contract with UNM. According to
that report, Alford will receive a seven-year contract worth $18.2 million from UCLA. He will be paid $2.6 million per year and a $200,000 signing bonus. Today, Alford replaces UCLA Bruins head coach Ben Howland, who has led the team through NCAA tournaments for the last 10 years. Frank said UNM will do its best to find a new coach as soon as possible. “I have full faith that our athletic director and his team will do a comprehensive and exhaustive search for the next head coach,” he said. “We will expedite that process so we have clear direction soon.” In the meantime, associate head coach Craig Neal will be the team’s interim coach. Frank said that because of Neal’s extensive experience with the Lobos, he is the best man for the job. “He has been involved in all aspects of the program’s operation and will provide a smooth transition to the next phase of Lobo basketball,” Frank said. UNM student Michael Walsh said Alford’s departure will affect players’ performance. “He’s had his plan set up for a couple of years now, went through them, but it sucks for all the recruits. He recruited all of them and he just leaves,” Walsh said.
Walsh said that at this point, UNM can do nothing to reverse Alford’s decision. But he said Alford might be better able to showcase his coaching skills at UCLA, as he said the Bruins have been in the NCAA Final Four three times in the past 10 years. “He’s already the highest-paid coach the Lobos have ever had, so we can’t offer him any more money,” Walsh said. “We’ve given him everything he wants. He just wants to prove himself at UCLA.” Taylor Sumter, manager of the women’s basketball team, said Alford’s decision was not a bad one. “I think he needed to make a decision that was best for him,” she said. “Coaching changes happen. They’re inevitable and everybody just has to keep going. He had to do what’s best for him.” Sumter said that although Alford’s decision makes the future of the men’s basketball team uncertain, she still wishes Alford good luck at UCLA. “It sounded like he had pretty much made up his mind, and there’s nothing we can do to make him stay,” she said. “He made a decision and he decided to stick with it. It might be best for him to bring his coaching career to UCLA.”
Craig Fritz / AP Photo In this March 2 file photo, New Mexico head coach Steve Alford signals to his players during the first half of their NCAA college basketball game against Wyoming in Albuquerque. UCLA announced on Saturday that Alford has been hired as the new men’s basketball coach, luring him from New Mexico days after he signed a new 10year deal with the Lobos.
What to do about Johnson Center, SHAC? 7 ideas by Rebecca Gonzales and Rosario Marroquin-Flores news@dailylobo.com
Enthusiasm for a proposal to address concerns with Johnson Center and the Student Health and Counseling building has faded due to cost concerns. So the task force created six new alternatives to the proposal. Representatives from the UNM administration, ASUNM and employees from Johnson Center and SHAC make up the 29-person task force that has discussed repairs or possible replacements for those buildings for the past seven years. Almost a decade ago, the University identified areas of concern within both buildings. Among these were outdated classrooms, inadequate office space and lack of amenities in Johnson as well as insufficient patient space in the SHAC building, which led to patient privacy issues. The task force only examined costs for the option proposed in 2009. It entailed creating a completely new building, the Health and Wellness Center, and no renovations for the Johnson Center or SHAC building. This option would result in a $117 fee increase per student for the fall and spring semesters, and a $25 fee increase per student for the summer session, until the building was fully paid for. The six alternatives, which were devised in the fall, include plans such as the renovation of the existing
Inside the
Daily Lobo volume 117
issue 129
buildings and an addition to Johnson. Some skip renovations entirely and propose the construction of a single new building that combines SHAC and Johnson Center, and another proposes rebuilding Johnson Center and SHAC. According to a PowerPoint on the subject, funding could come from a combination of student fees and capital outlay money, depending on which of the seven options is selected. The alternative options were created to shift the cost from student fees, said ASUNM president Caroline Muraida. UNM provided opportunities for student input, including an extensive survey in which 3,500 UNM students voiced their opinions on the problems with both buildings, and presentations about the different options. “We consider the students to be our clients,” said Melissa Vargas, chief of staff and strategic planner for the provost’s office. “We don’t make decisions about amenities. If they say, ‘We need a running track,’ we include a running track. We take our lead from the students.” Vargas said 11 members of the task force are student representatives from ASUNM and other student organizations. The task force has visited wellness centers in other universities and helped shape the plans for UNM. The remaining 18 members consist of representatives from other interested parties including the Johnson Center and SHAC building administration and the Athletics Department.
“I am really interested in where (the project) is going,” said ASUNM Sen. Rachel Williams. “This could make for a healthier campus and healthier and better student lives.” Scott O’Connor, who is pursuing his master’s degree in sports administration and teaches seven physical education classes at UNM, said the fitness facility should be a source of pride and inspiration for UNM and its community. “As of now, we are well behind other Universities of our stature in the level and caliber of our fitness facility,” he said. “We must stay current to attract more students, even out-of-state students.” O’Connor said improvements to Johnson are necessary because the amenities and classrooms are outdated, the floor plan is confusing and general safety is an issue. “With a new recreation facility, I would hope for an indoor running track to be constructed … which would provide a safe environment for the entire UNM community,” O’Connor said. “This is imperative, especially after … this school year with the attacks on women.” Vargas said new opportunities for student involvement in the project, such as a new survey and additional public meetings about the center, are slated to begin in the fall. Further debate about the proposals will be at the Board of Regents meeting April 9 in SUB Ballroom C at 9 a.m.
Fleeing the circus
Would you like to play a game?
see Page 2
see Page 3
OPTION DETAILS
1
A separate structure connected to Johnson Center via bridge, containing amenties such as a climbing wall, leisure pool, cardio and weight room, indoor track, juice bar and coffee shop.
2
A separate structure connected to Johnson Center, containing replacement facilities for both Johnson Center and the SHAC building.
3
A separate structure connected to Johnson Center as described in option No. 1, including new SHAC facilities, but without a leisure pool, no renovations to existing Johnson Center pool facilities
4
A separate structure, lacking a leisure pool and new SHAC facilities, renovating existing Johnson Center pool facilities
5
A separate structure, lacking a leisure pool and a climbing wall, but including new SHAC facilities, renovating existing Johnson Center pool facilities
6
A separate structure connected to Johnson Center via bridge as described in option No. 1, and a new separate SHAC building
7
A separate structure containing only replacement academic facilities/offices for those in Johnson Center, along with replacement SHAC pharmacy/health education facilities
TODAY
69 | 42