Anyone paying out of state rates to go to Alabama....over in state to Rutgers is not doing for academics.
The applications are up but not sure the quality of students applying is going up. The Alabama fever has not caught on in my town. NESCAC and Vandy are very popular after the top tier schools. If any school is offering you a free ride, you should consider it. But I personally wouldn't pay out of state tuition for Bama over In-state Rutgers.
What about even money (out of state vs out of state)? I still go with Rutgers.
I already stated that if you get a full ride at any school you have to consider it. It's difficult to beat free unless they don't have your major or you just don't like the environment. RU also gives out academic scholarships (partial or full).But it's not even money. I believe Bama is giving full rides to top out of state students that qualify for the Honors College.
Good thing you're not speaking as a professor because that's a remarkably dumb thing to say...laughably absurd, in fact!
I've always wondered how so many so-called educated people could be so clueless when it comes to the importance of marketing/branding and the positive impact that successful sports programs can have on the university as a whole. Look no further than the fact that we're B1G.
sorry, I don't get your point. The thread is about winning football programs can help attract better students. My point is that it will not. It might increase applications but not better students. As a football fan, I want to see the team do better. However, the school's main focus should be on improving academic reputation. I think the honors college is a good start.
You should read scarletstate's post. Alabama is the exception, not the norm. RU lost 36mm last year. one can argue addition by subtraction.This is a big difference you guys don't seem to get:
“There’s less of a ‘Let’s get athletics’ among our faculty than most places,” said Dr. K. Clark Midkiff, a professor of mechanical engineering here for 30 years and a former president of the faculty senate. “I think what they are doing with athletics is reasonable and proper. Yes, winning three national champions was a nice bump, but it isn’t the dominant reason for our growth. We had a vision as an institution, and a lot of people worked hard to make it work.”
Last year, the athletic department recorded a $33 million profit, according to university documents. It gave $9.1 million to the university, including $4 million for the university’s Presidential Scholarships, which go to top-performing students. Since 2010, athletics have also provided $1 million annually toward faculty salaries. The biggest line item in the budget is $16 million to pay for more than 300 scholarships at full price.
Football and in a few cases men's basketball are the marketing arm of a university. Unless you are an Ivy, MIT, CalTech Duke or similar you need big time athletics and even some of those guys have embraced the value of football. Even the Ivy League has a TV deal on NBCSN these days.
How many academically relevant state universities are there in the top 50 that are also not relevant athletically - UCSD? Maybe there are 2-3 others?