Yeah, the joke is in bad taste. Almost no one would disagree, but name calling is childish, unnecessary and against policy
If UAB could fire up some donors and students, surely the MAC schools would. My preference would be to scale back, but as long as the costs are subsidized by students and the University, there is little reason.
Ohio State is the biggest positive outlier in this conversation. Their success and number of athletic programs is not the norm.
I think you can justify the programs even at the weakest Power 5 schools, but I have a hard time justifying it for EMU, Miami (OH), etc.
Yes, the Flutie Effect is very real in recruiting students, but it is a short-term bubble.
Even within the the power 5 though, many of the programs cannot survive without student subsidies. Is this justified? Perhaps, but at what cost to the overall mission of the University?
The big public universities are not the ones that take on heavy loads of debt compared to BGSU, Eastern Michigan, Toledo, or Miami. Do the MAC schools also get big donors based on football?
Also, another argument is that football helps with non-athlete student recruiting. I have NEVER heard anyone say they are going to a MAC school for the football team. Perhaps school spirit and the football team is somewhat embedded in that, but not solely football.
You are probably right, but if you look at the schools with the highest percentage of alumni who donate and they are: Princeton, Williams, Amherst (etc.) This was taken from the 2015 U.S. News....
Clearly, they do not play D-1 football. I would hope for love of University, philanthropy, and learning, gifts would still be plentiful.
I enjoyed the article and the Outside The Lines segment on this yesterday.
College football is an unsustainable enterprise for the vast majority of programs. Remember, only 1/3 are part of the Power 5. Some University subsidies are okay, but it may eventually cater.
UAB provides an interesting case study---they tried to dismantle the program and it failed. I wonder what other programs can learn from their struggle.
Do folks think there would be a true outcry if 1-A MAC football ceased to exist? If you told students, "your fees will reduce by this much and we hire more faculty for smaller classes" I would be optimistic about their response.
Because teenagers are fickle. The Oklahoma loss can reinforce the idea that Stoops has lost it and the Texas victory can help convince a kid to be a part of a rising Texas star
One needs to remember that coaches such as Tressel and Meyer came of age with the traditional media. As their generation passes through, younger coaches will be more willing to give access to these newfangled "websites."
In addition, sports journalism is becoming more and more narrow and the Dispatch and others cannot give the depth of coverage that 11W gives. While they will certainly put someone on the beat, they cannot give the space or time to someone who will become fully entrenched.
Very good first step. Now they need to play more basketball games there. The NIT game against Dayton a while back was electric.
I most look forward to a cheesy 1970s style theme song with individual introductions
Just looked it up.....Ugh. This would have prevented me from earning a double major and and double minor in four years:
Starting autumn semester 2012, students enrolled in more than 18 credit hours will be billed for credits beyond 18, in addition to billing for full-time enrollment (12-18 credits, for undergraduate students). The "Over 18 Hours" rate is the same as the per credit hour rate up to 12 hours, and applies only to instructional, general and non-resident fees
Does Ohio State now limit the name of credits you can take a semester without extra fees? I remember taking 25 credits a quarter with others taking 14 and paying the same amount. Granted, I was a liberal arts major and the course work wasn't nearly as heavy as some majors in the hard sciences and engineering.
I think it would be prudent to suggest that *some* debt is okay. If a little debt (10k-20k) can get you into an ivy, prestigious liberal arts school, etc, it might be worth it if that is the type of school you want.
If your test scores are high enough to get a full ride from Bama and you demonstrate financial aid, you should look at more prestigious schools. The top tier institutions yearn for lower income students with high grades.
Also, the only reason football should influence your decision is if you walk on.
Team need is always more important than position
Not related, but it is fascinating to look at the five star guys and see how many never made it to the NFL. There is something to be said for a program molding student athletes into professional football players
Given the history and legacy of certain teams, I have no problem with Nebraska in the top 8. College football didn't start in the year 2000.
Aww. You have crushed my dreams.
The Cleveland Browns can trade the first round pick they got from the Eagles for Bosa. Problem solved
Not to defend Michigan, but their admit rate is still much lower, around 28%, compared to 55% for the good guys. The better metric to use would be yield rates--how many admitted students choose to attend.
As a teacher in New York, our top kids still won't choose Ohio State, unfortunately, if they are looking at public schools--they will choose Cal, UCLA, Michigan, Virginia, Irvine, Wisconsin, Davis and William and Mary over Ohio State
I worry that we rely on so many out-of-state students and international applicants to boost our selectivity, and possibly, our scores.
I don't care much for test scores or rankings, and would like to see us guarantee admission to the 10% of any high schoo in the State of Ohio, like UTexas did, to increase diversity and honor their mission to the State of Texas