prankster
Twister Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2011
- Messages
- 4,349
- Reaction Score
- 5,438
Time To Disconnect Universities from College Sports?
- Thread starter prankster
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 29,356
- Reaction Score
- 46,661
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/opinion/nocera-the-way-to-run-college-sports.html?_r=0
I don't know if they are qualified or not for their own jobs, never mind everything else, but the question begs: who is qualified to run it? Certainly not the athletic people. When they were in charge, UNC shams were the norm. Cedric Dempsey leaves the NCAA and goes to work for the Pumps.
I think your title is the proper question. Is it time to separate the two? But Nocera's frame is problematic: "That whatever their academic and fund-raising skills, they are in over their heads whenever they involve themselves in the $6 billion-and-counting business that big-time college sports has become? Besides, don’t they have other things to do"
It's $6 billion in aggregate. When you take the budgets of the academic side, they dwarf that figure. PSU's budget alone, for instance, is $4 billion. So, whatever their skills, the question of whether or not they are fit for the job has little to do with the size of the industry, since these people who may or may not be talentless are in charge of a much much bigger industry. If you leave it up to those more closely connected with sports, you get all sorts of other problems and dysfunctionality. The biggest problem are the politicians and boosters. If you really want to address the problem, you go to the source. And the only answer at that point is the answer to your opening question.
I don't know if they are qualified or not for their own jobs, never mind everything else, but the question begs: who is qualified to run it? Certainly not the athletic people. When they were in charge, UNC shams were the norm. Cedric Dempsey leaves the NCAA and goes to work for the Pumps.
I think your title is the proper question. Is it time to separate the two? But Nocera's frame is problematic: "That whatever their academic and fund-raising skills, they are in over their heads whenever they involve themselves in the $6 billion-and-counting business that big-time college sports has become? Besides, don’t they have other things to do"
It's $6 billion in aggregate. When you take the budgets of the academic side, they dwarf that figure. PSU's budget alone, for instance, is $4 billion. So, whatever their skills, the question of whether or not they are fit for the job has little to do with the size of the industry, since these people who may or may not be talentless are in charge of a much much bigger industry. If you leave it up to those more closely connected with sports, you get all sorts of other problems and dysfunctionality. The biggest problem are the politicians and boosters. If you really want to address the problem, you go to the source. And the only answer at that point is the answer to your opening question.
- Status