(Austin-American Statesman) Professor challenges the role of athletics at UT

and for the record, I don't mind if the sports are losing a little money or barely breaking even...

My problems have always been with making sure the sports fit in with an academic culture of a university.. I like colleges having sports, and as long as they have some integrity.. have no problem with them

 

And I'm just responding to the UT accounting prof saying that most schools are probably in the red

He is an accounting prof, I assume he knows what he is talking about

 

You guys actually pay attention to the US News rankings for undergraduate schools? I looked at them when applying to law school but only because I was thinking about getting a job after law school. I don't honestly think that a school ranked higher is automatically better than a school ranked lower just because US News says it is.

Having worked for the UT Annual Fund, I can tell you from first hand experience that one of the main reasons that UT doesn't rank so well in these polls is because the Alumni don't give money to academics. One of the factors in these polls is Alumni Giving. UT always ranks low in this because people would rather give to Athletics for many reasons:

1 - They're out of school. They might not care as much about how high the school is ranked NOW.

2 - The Athletics department offers something in return for the donation: the ability to purchase football season tickets.

3 - The alumni feel that the University has enough money already because of the big dollar donations of a few alumni (Red McCombs, Joe Jamail, etc)

Next, UT will never rank highly in the number of classes under 20 students category because at a University with close to 50,000 students, it's damn near impossible to have that be a possibility. Personally, I don't care about class size because some of the most interesting classes I've taken have been larger sized classes. On the same note, we will always rank low (or high) in the "bad" category of classes over 50 students for the same reason.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, the "graduation rate" is the percent of students graduating in 4 years. Most students at UT don't graduate in 4 years (I think 4.5 is the average). To punish a University for the students taking an extra semester or 2 seems strange to me.

Some of the other categories seem to be out of place, too. Why do the average SAT/ACT scores count in a study talking about the quality of a college? Are we to assume that students who score higher on the SAT/ACT automatically make a college better? What about the numerous number of UT students in the top 10% that don't bother studying for the SAT because they are guaranteed admission?

The acceptance rate of a college is also counted which is something that can be controlled by the college itself. UT has a problem however, in that it must offer admission to any top 10% student from Texas. Most students take advantage of this and use UT as a "backup" in case they don't get into a higher prestige school. This hurts the rankings, as well.

There are other problems with the methodology but let's just say that if you want to know how good a school is, look at its reputation in the various academic fields.

 

I thought being top 10% didn't get you in anymore? I thought it only guarenteed you admission into a UT-system school, but not necessarily UT-Austin....

 

One thing that is being overlooked is that college is not just about the education you get in the classroom. It's also about that transition from teenager to adult. It's about learning how to deal with problems without your parents around (for many students). Athletics, whether NCAA or intramural, contribute to your education. IMO, student athletes are getting a little extra education when you throw in the fact that they have to better learn time management and problem solving, moreso than the average student.

The professor is wrong. He was probably chosen last constantly as a child when it came to playing games. College is not just about the classroom. His conclusions are just too simplistic.

 

you can have an athletic program without sacrificing academics, etc..

You don't have to be the best football team in america.. to get the benefits of learning time management, etc..

 

Personally, I don't care what athletics get. It's just frustrating when such a huge chunk of funding gets sent to athletics which, in the overall, mean virtually nothing to society as a whole.

There are university departments at every college that are woefully under-funded compared to athletic programs. And keep in mind that much of the most crucial scientific, medical and academic resarch done in the US - a lot of which can save lives, innovate and improve the economy - is done at the university level.

I guess it would just be nice to see everyone getting equal shares based on need. Athletics, while a lot of fun, are completely and utterly un-necessary in the grand scheme of things. It doesn't mean we should eliminate them. It just means we should keep them in the proper perspective.

 

Yup.

 

UT is one of the top 5 well rounded college experiences one could ever hope to have. As an alum, I got the best of both worlds. An excellent education, along with a great social scene and outstanding athletics. Personally, I don't think there are too many colleges if any that provide that well rounded experience.

And yes, the athletic program factored into my decision to be a Horn. My passion is sports, so naturally I wanted a school with good athletics along with good academics. UT-Austin was perfect and in state.

Sorry, but I don't agree with the professor at all. I'll take my well rounded college experience over a more academic oriented one any day of the week. Students don't just go to college to be taught academically, they grow up socially as well, and the teachers work for the students in college, to put it bluntly.

The students/their families are the ones paying for tuition, textbooks, etc and if we don't want to take a class we can find a different one or take it somewhere else. Go ask the vast majority of UT students about the college experience and the response would be similar to mine in a majority of cases I would imagine. To me we have the perfect balance between academics and extra curricular activities.

Also, keep in mind a large part of the alumni donates back to the athletics programs. When I can afford to do so, I will do so as well. That partly explains why we can afford renovations to athletic facilities and high coaches salaries. But don't kid yourself, the academic facilities/equipment are top of the line as well.

 

since culture seemed to be what the poster wanted to talk about...

I think having athletics is great, as long as the culture doesn't get out of hand..

there are seriously fans of teams (not just UT) who wouldn't care if the players were being paid under the table as long as they are winning...

hopefully UT never gets to that level.. ...

or even to the level of ohio state situations etc.

 

and to be fair, I don't think the professor is wanting to get rid of all of athletics... just wants to keep it in control it seems...

You can get benefits of a well rounded experience without having the most massive program ..

 

A classics professor doesn't like athletics. Wow, front page news flash.

 

The athletic program pays for itself. We're not Berkley or UVA, but we're not exacty ark. or ole miss.

 

as I pointed out
Thank Title IX
do you think that should be revoked?

Most Mens sports at an institution like UT
turn a profit
BaseBall, Football and Basketball [women's BBall maybe]
.. . I would bet good money
that they all turn a profit

If you cut the rest of Athletics. .. the extra money could go there

Are you willing to tell all the other sports
either find a way to support yourself or be out?
and a good number of them are Female sports

Rocket River