Rutgers Prof: "Sports stars should be recruited as athletes not as jocks masquerading as scholars."

[Sir ScarletKnight]

Here's the original article, Targum September 25th.

http://www.dailytargum.com/article/...oo-much-money-to-athletic-programs-facilities

This was in the paper yesterday.

http://www.dailytargum.com/article/...s-on-u-athletics-prove-to-be-misguided-simple

Ugh. Can't believe this guy teaches at Rutgers. Then again, most student reviews seem to say he doesn't teach at all.

 

[RUJohnny99]

If he requires an electrician to replace a light bulb, spending on athletics is the least of his worries.

 

[RUich]

The good prof. is working at the wrong place if he believes what he said. Maybe, just maybe, he isn't smart
enough to work at those high prestige places where athletics are considered as "clubs".
Does he also feel that non athletic minority students who do not qualify academically should be excluded from the opportunity to get a college education?

 

[RU4Real]

My response to professor Ward would be that maybe Rutgers should spend a lot less money on the elucidation of biochemical components in the bioluminescence of coelenterates.

 

[yesrutgers01]

So, this professor doesn't understand naming rights to a stadium?
And he has 0 credibility about only 1 player on the entire FB team would have earned admission without football.

 

[Jersey Boys]

Yawn

 

[AreYouNUTS]

I'd sue the guy for defamation of character (or whatever). Lots of assumption on his behalf, about each and every scholarship athlete, with comments as such.

 

[mal359]

RMP is used exclusively by the lowest common denominator of students.

 

[RUScrew85]

Ya know seeing the recent reputation of "Higher Education" I'd stay off my high horse if I were him.

 

[mal359]

The good prof. is working at the wrong place if he believes what he said. Maybe, just maybe, he isn't smart
enough to work at those high prestige places where athletics are considered as "clubs".
Does he also feel that non athletic minority students who do not qualify academically should be excluded from the opportunity to get a college education?

Way to put down your own alma mater.

 

[KnightsofChrome]

The good prof. is working at the wrong place if he believes what he said. Maybe, just maybe, he isn't smart
enough to work at those high prestige places where athletics are considered as "clubs".
Does he also feel that non athletic minority students who do not qualify academically should be excluded from the opportunity to get a college education?

I don't know about him, but I do! As a minority myself that did not play any sports in College, it was my responsibility to not only be accepted at the College of my choice, but continue to strive for passing grades while there! My background as a minority is a familiar one, single mom(seamstress), no dad, raised in the projects of Jersey City, with little to no hope of leaving. It was up to me! I played by the rules in and out of the classroom, studied, completed homework, worked part time, and babysat at night. I still was able to receive passing grades(B average), while playing three sports. Qualifying academically is not a right or some sort of entitlement, it must be earned! The same thing can be said for a College education!
So, please stop with all the racist entitlement stuff. It's actually an insult to those of us who pushed, suffered, and fought our way to equality, by just doing the right thing!

 

[kapyoche]

He is 100% right.
I think big time sports (football and basketball) should be decoupled from the university and turned into separate entities with university holding 51% ownership and rest publicly traded on the stock exchange or sold to investors. And make the academics very light (just the basics). Forget all the useless courses such as calc, chem, bio, physics, and many others.
The way it exists right now is a total joke and corrupt.

 

[imbazza]

So just how many "Dumb Jocks" made Deans list last year?

 

[mal359]

Funny, a friend of mine who is an URM feels the same way as KnightsOfChrome.

Of course, being a white male from a relatively comfy background, I don't usually feel the need to comment on struggles that I won't understand.

 

[mdk02]

Always loved the unnamed sources.

So just how many "Dumb Jocks" made Deans list last year?

Gotta love the unnamed sources. Beyond that, and not even considering the walk-ons, at least 3 scholarship players were recruited by Ivy schools. Ron'Dell Carter by half the damn Ivy League. I'm calling BS.

 

[Bagarocks]

My response to professor Ward would be that maybe Rutgers should spend a lot less money on the elucidation of biochemical components in the bioluminescence of coelenterates.

Im with ya! whatever that means

 

[RUJEEPFAN]

you know what they say...Those who can't do teach...

 

[mal359]

you know what they say...Those who can't do teach...

The professor in question has done plenty.

 

[AreYouNUTS]

So just how many "Dumb Jocks" made Deans list last year?

11 on men's soccer alone.

 

[Sir ScarletKnight]

11 on men's soccer alone.

In this context, he's referring only to football and basketball.

 

[brgossRU90]

We've already been down this road before too many times.

 

[RUJEEPFAN]

The professor in question has done plenty.

yeah, my life has been greatly improved by the Associate Professor of Bioluminescence. Just another leftwing member of academia who spouts the usual union BS about more money for classes and salaries and professors instead of athletics and that all athletes are dopes. Could not care less what he has "accomplished" ( so save the lecture) and he should actually understand that he gets to spout his liberal nonsense at a much higher rated, Big Ten affiliated, academic institution than it was 5 years ago...a feat largely accomplished BY FOOTBALL and its' ability to gain admittance to the Big Ten. Arguably we are now in the 2nd highest rated grouping of schools in the country behind the Ivy League and perhaps the PAC10. I would rather he just say thank you football morons for letting me spout on about shiny water.

Drops mic...

 

[Knight Shift]

So, this professor doesn't understand naming rights to a stadium?
And he has 0 credibility about only 1 player on the entire FB team would have earned admission without football.

A professor of biochemistry, clueless and/or angry at a donor that does IT work in life sciences and healthcare, and by their website, states that the plan to make a continuing and broadening contribution to the university, helping the student body in areas of entrepreneurship, business ethics and business leadership.

Maybe he could ask them for a donation to change his light bulb.

Reminds me of the line from an old punk song, "If you don't know Mojo Nixon, your store could use some fixin'"

The prof's attitude could use some fixin'.

 

[Retired711]

I didn't find this piece very logical. Why does having sports stars admitted just as athletes solve the problems he cites? If anything, it would mean *more* of a disconnect between academics and athletics, yet it is that disconnect that he attacks. I also found unimpressive the refusal to do simple research (e..g. what is a nittany? Why is the stadium named that way?). Since this professor is tenured, I assume that his work in his field is far better than what he presents here.

I do have sympathy with him over the tight academic budget. I'm sure he would like to believe that cutting the subsidy to athletics would help solve that problem. But it seems to me the vast bulk of the subsidy goes to non-revenue sports as well as women's basketball -- activities that he might well approve of.

 

[AreYouNUTS]

In this context, he's referring only to football and basketball.

Fine. Remember the assumptions that Don Imus made about our women's basketball team when they played for the national title?

 

[Sir ScarletKnight]

Fine. Remember the assumptions that Don Imus made about our women's basketball team when they played for the national title?

Don't worry, I don't agree with him in any way. I just want to make sure that when you put him down, you do it right.

Take a gander at the second link I provided.

 

[ruhudsonfan]

The professor's piece is not well researched or thought out. And frankly, it's ignorant. If one of his students turned in such shoddily researched work, I'm sure he would fail them.

That said, we, as die hard fans, can't expect the faculty, staff or general public to dig down into the true financial footing of the program. They see a 9 figure stadium expansion and are sitting in offices with no heat. One isn't the result of the other, but as someone who sat with them for two years (with my jacket on during office hours), it's frustrating. In 2 years on Douglas, my office never had heat, flooded 3x, had ceiling tiles fall on my laptop while I was teaching and the AC ducts had visible mold on them.

Decades of delayed upkeep have put a faculty already against big time athletics in an even worse mood.

 

[Upstream]

I'm sure he would like to believe that cutting the subsidy to athletics would help solve that problem. But it seems to me the vast bulk of the subsidy goes to non-revenue sports as well as women's basketball -- activities that he might well approve of.

Well, since Football and Men's Basketball generate a profit, it is fair to say that 100% of the subsidy go to non-revenue sports and WBB. The problem for Rutgers is that FB and MBB need to be even more profitable in order to subsidize the rest of the student athletic program, as is the case at other schools.

 

[RAC’emUp]

yeah, my life has been greatly improved by the Associate Professor of Bioluminescence. Just another leftwing member of academia who spouts the usual union BS about more money for classes and salaries and professors instead of athletics and that all athletes are dopes. Could not care less what he has "accomplished" ( so save the lecture) and he should actually understand that he gets to spout his liberal nonsense at a much higher rated, Big Ten affiliated, academic institution than it was 5 years ago...a feat largely accomplished BY FOOTBALL and its' ability to gain admittance to the Big Ten. Arguably we are now in the 2nd highest rated grouping of schools in the country behind the Ivy League and perhaps the PAC10. I would rather he just say thank you football morons for letting me spout on about shiny water.

Drops mic...

Agree or disagree, this is not a liberal/conservative argument. Plenty of conservatives would adhere to it. You are actually demonstrating a very narrow world view yourself to see everything from that perspective. It doesn't help you make your point.

 

[Upstream]

The professor's piece is not well researched or thought out. And frankly, it's ignorant. If one of his students turned in such shoddily researched work, I'm sure he would fail them.

That said, we, as die hard fans, can't expect the faculty, staff or general public to dig down into the true financial footing of the program. They see a 9 figure stadium expansion and are sitting in offices with no heat. One isn't the result of the other, but as someone who sat with them for two years (with my jacket on during office hours), it's frustrating. In 2 years on Douglas, my office never had heat, flooded 3x, had ceiling tiles fall on my laptop while I was teaching and the AC ducts had visible mold on them.

Decades of delayed upkeep have put a faculty already against big time athletics in an even worse mood.

This is a big reason that Football fans should support efforts to reduce the subsidy. While it won't really make a difference in terms of funding for academic programs or buildings, it would at least make it more difficult for anti-athletic professors to complain about money spent on athletics.

 

[theRU]

Here's the original article, Targum September 25th.

http://www.dailytargum.com/article/...oo-much-money-to-athletic-programs-facilities

This was in the paper yesterday.

http://www.dailytargum.com/article/...s-on-u-athletics-prove-to-be-misguided-simple

Ugh. Can't believe this guy teaches at Rutgers. Then again, most student reviews seem to say he doesn't teach at all.

He is right... and since the university is a state institution i feel NJ should raise taxes and increase their funding.................................................................................... Oh whats that? Nobody wants this option either. Go pound sand professor.

 

[RU4Real]

I didn't find this piece very logical. Why does having sports stars admitted just as athletes solve the problems he cites? If anything, it would mean *more* of a disconnect between academics and athletics, yet it is that disconnect that he attacks. I also found unimpressive the refusal to do simple research (e..g. what is a nittany? Why is the stadium named that way?). Since this professor is tenured, I assume that his work in his field is far better than what he presents here.

I do have sympathy with him over the tight academic budget. I'm sure he would like to believe that cutting the subsidy to athletics would help solve that problem. But it seems to me the vast bulk of the subsidy goes to non-revenue sports as well as women's basketball -- activities that he might well approve of.

This is really the bit that people don't get. College sports at any level is a losing proposition for all but a select few. The big-brand elite programs pull in enough revenue from football to balance the overall athletics budget (or even give money back to the school) but that's the exception rather than the rule.

Other programs (such as Rutgers) show football as a break-even proposition (minus capital improvements which are largely funded outside the school's revenue stream) and the subsidies go to pay for everything else.

The overwhelming majority of schools, whether they're in D1, D2 or D3, subsidize nearly the entire athletics budget. By way of example, Princeton University's athletics subsidy is $26.4 million - a number which isn't too far from RU's.

 

[ruhudsonfan]

This is really the bit that people don't get. College sports at any level is a losing proposition for all but a select few. The big-brand elite programs pull in enough revenue from football to balance the overall athletics budget (or even give money back to the school) but that's the exception rather than the rule.

Other programs (such as Rutgers) show football as a break-even proposition (minus capital improvements which are largely funded outside the school's revenue stream) and the subsidies go to pay for everything else.

The overwhelming majority of schools, whether they're in D1, D2 or D3, subsidize nearly the entire athletics budget. By way of example, Princeton University's athletics subsidy is $26.4 million - a number which isn't too far from RU's.

You're 100% correct. But the Princeton profs don't squawk, because they are sitting in mahogany paneled offices that rival those of Fortune 100 CEOs. They go into their classrooms and everything works. It's the same reason Stanford, Duke and Michigan profs don't squawk.

The argument is illogical for the reasons we both provide. But that doesn't assuage the frustrations of those sitting in buildings that are practically falling down around them. Hickman Hall, as an example, needs about 500 pounds of C4, more than it needs an electrician.

 

[RU4Real]

You're 100% correct. But the Princeton profs don't squawk, because they are sitting in mahogany paneled offices that rival those of Fortune 100 CEOs. They go into their classrooms and everything works. It's the same reason Stanford, Duke and Michigan profs don't squawk.

The argument is illogical for the reasons we both provide. But that doesn't assuage the frustrations of those sitting in buildings that are practically falling down around them. Hickman Hall, as an example, needs about 500 pounds of C4, more than it needs an electrician.

No argument from me on any of this. But the frustration is misplaced and that it's misplaced at the hands of ostensibly intelligent people is, to me, disconcerting.

When you get right down to it, the conflation of all the issues we've raised here comes down to one thing, only: endowment.

Rutgers University is one of the largest public universities in the country and has an endowment of $780 million.

Princeton's endowment is $21 billion.

By way of contrast my daughter's current digs, Dickinson College, has an endowment of $425 million - more than half of RU's, at a school with 2400 students.

When you're a college or university trying to keep the heat on using nothing other than tuition and taxpayer money, you're gonna come up short.

 

[RUBOB72]

We haven't learned anything from this mess have we?.... Ward 's claim is total here-say? ... When the media and general public can make an unsubstantiated B.S. claim about something.... and then don't verify their sources by name ...it's just not worth of any credibility... Prof. Ward is a moron...How the hell can you call yourself educated and write total nonsense as he does...I guess the one player must have been Dave Milewski? ...

 

[ruhudsonfan]

We haven't learned anything from this mess have we?.... Ward 's claim is total here-say? ... When the media and general public can make an unsubstantiated B.S. claim about something.... and then don't verify their sources by name ...it's just not worth of any credibility... Prof. Ward is a moron...How the hell can you call yourself educated and write total nonsense as he does...I guess the one player must have been Dave Milewski? ...

In fairness to the dopey professor, it's an opinion piece. Write an a counter piece, much like the current student did. It was also published.

 

[REDRICH65]

Very revealing thread about the beliefs of the members of this board. But not too surprising. After all, it is a sports board.

 

[RU848789]

You're 100% correct. But the Princeton profs don't squawk, because they are sitting in mahogany paneled offices that rival those of Fortune 100 CEOs. They go into their classrooms and everything works. It's the same reason Stanford, Duke and Michigan profs don't squawk.

The argument is illogical for the reasons we both provide. But that doesn't assuage the frustrations of those sitting in buildings that are practically falling down around them. Hickman Hall, as an example, needs about 500 pounds of C4, more than it needs an electrician.

lol, my son has a class in Hickman this semester - was a dump 25 years ago and it's not improving. I have several prof friends at RU who rail at the lousy infrastructure and lack of financial support from the State and alums and it's very easy for them to be pissed off at the "luxurious" football program (relatively speaking it is). It really is disappointing. Of course ending the subsidy would have zero impact on them, but it's an easy target.

 

[Southern Gentleman]

I don't know about him, but I do! As a minority myself that did not play any sports in College, it was my responsibility to not only be accepted at the College of my choice, but continue to strive for passing grades while there! My background as a minority is a familiar one, single mom(seamstress), no dad, raised in the projects of Jersey City, with little to no hope of leaving. It was up to me! I played by the rules in and out of the classroom, studied, completed homework, worked part time, and babysat at night. I still was able to receive passing grades(B average), while playing three sports. Qualifying academically is not a right or some sort of entitlement, it must be earned! The same thing can be said for a College education!
So, please stop with all the racist entitlement stuff. It's actually an insult to those of us who pushed, suffered, and fought our way to equality, by just doing the right thing!

YOU, are what makes America GREAT! And I salute your perseverance! You are a good person! I just wanted you to know!

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

I'd sue the guy for defamation of character (or whatever). Lots of assumption on his behalf, about each and every scholarship athlete, with comments as such.

How about a small class action... Is that a thing?