- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why are universities with strong athletic curricula, looked down upon by some....
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:43 pm to AbitaFan08
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:43 pm to AbitaFan08
quote:
But quoting yourself? And not actually making a valid point? I guess I’m asking...why?
All my points are valid. You can't understand because you aren't capable.
2
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:44 pm to LakeViewLSU
I actually understand what you are saying, and as a college professor with a Ph.D. in Higher Education from lowly LSU, allow me some latitude in answering your question.
The average intellectual is among the worst person on earth. I had a love for sports, and I couldn't hit a high school curve ball, but I had a thirst for knowledge. Those two worlds have always been at odds. Jocks vs. Nerds, for instance.
Now for 100 years, athletics at institutions of learning were an extension of the education process. Educating the whole person, including physical, was a hallmark of colleges. Then something happened - college sports, mainly football, began creating more money than the academic side.
So colleges poured resources into football. History department would see layoffs, football would get new facilities. This created animosity among the faculty, who would remind administrators what colleges are really for. Some would pull back (see the Ivy League's de-emphaisization of athletics), but most pushed forward.
The average college professor makes a good living - around $92,000 per year. When you build in the benefits (I only work 9 months a year, I am able to use facilities for my research, and my children get free tuition), I do well for myself. But this is peanuts in comparison to low level assistant coaches at P5 schools.
I see the benefits of college sports. Some of my colleagues do not and subscribe to a worldview of "its not fair" what they get, which creates the perception that academics look down on athletics. At more academic minded institutions, you see this more. At an SEC school not named Vanderbilt, you rarely see it because when you take that job, you know that LSU is a member of the SEC and what that entails.
The average intellectual is among the worst person on earth. I had a love for sports, and I couldn't hit a high school curve ball, but I had a thirst for knowledge. Those two worlds have always been at odds. Jocks vs. Nerds, for instance.
Now for 100 years, athletics at institutions of learning were an extension of the education process. Educating the whole person, including physical, was a hallmark of colleges. Then something happened - college sports, mainly football, began creating more money than the academic side.
So colleges poured resources into football. History department would see layoffs, football would get new facilities. This created animosity among the faculty, who would remind administrators what colleges are really for. Some would pull back (see the Ivy League's de-emphaisization of athletics), but most pushed forward.
The average college professor makes a good living - around $92,000 per year. When you build in the benefits (I only work 9 months a year, I am able to use facilities for my research, and my children get free tuition), I do well for myself. But this is peanuts in comparison to low level assistant coaches at P5 schools.
I see the benefits of college sports. Some of my colleagues do not and subscribe to a worldview of "its not fair" what they get, which creates the perception that academics look down on athletics. At more academic minded institutions, you see this more. At an SEC school not named Vanderbilt, you rarely see it because when you take that job, you know that LSU is a member of the SEC and what that entails.
This post was edited on 12/4/17 at 9:46 pm
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:44 pm to LakeViewLSU
Because some of the football players at those prestigious "football curriculum" schools can barely read.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:44 pm to LakeViewLSU
The old “I’m right you’re just too stupid to understand” argument. Always a classic.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:44 pm to LakeViewLSU
quote:
All my points are valid. You can't understand because you aren't capable.
You could just explain them instead of just saying you're smart and everyone else is dumb. However, you are now just talking out of your arse and I'm not sure you're capable of doing that.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:47 pm to LakeViewLSU
quote:
LSU has more players in the NFL than any other college program.
I am measuring the success of graduates of the football curriculum. It really isn't that hard to understand
Good football players tend not to be graduates.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:48 pm to anc
quote:
I actually understand what you are saying, and as a college professor with a Ph.D. in Higher Education from lowly LSU, allow me some latitude in answering your question. The average intellectual is among the worst person on earth. I had a love for sports, and I couldn't hit a high school curve ball, but I had a thirst for knowledge. Those two worlds have always been at odds. Jocks vs. Nerds, for instance. Now for 100 years, athletics at institutions of learning were an extension of the education process. Educating the whole person, including physical, was a hallmark of colleges. Then something happened - college sports, mainly football, began creating more money than the academic side. So colleges poured resources into football. History department would see layoffs, football would get new facilities. This created animosity among the faculty, who would remind administrators what colleges are really for. Some would pull back (see the Ivy League's de-emphaisization of athletics), but most pushed forward. The average college professor makes a good living - around $92,000 per year. When you build in the benefits (I only work 9 months a year, I am able to use facilities for my research, and my children get free tuition), I do well for myself. But this is peanuts in comparison to low level assistant coaches at P5 schools. I see the benefits of college sports. Some of my colleagues do not and subscribe to a worldview of "its not fair" what they get, which creates the perception that academics look down on athletics. At more academic minded institutions, you see this more. At an SEC school not named Vanderbilt, you rarely see it because when you take that job, you know that LSU is a member of the SEC and what that entails.
Wow, you actually gave your opinion to answer the question. Thanks.
This post was edited on 12/4/17 at 9:50 pm
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:49 pm to KG6
quote:
Because some of the football players at those prestigious "football curriculum" schools can barely read.
Two in a row that actually gave their opinion on the answer to the question!
I guess not everyone here is stupid.
This post was edited on 12/4/17 at 9:51 pm
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:52 pm to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
You could just explain them instead of just saying you're smart and everyone else is dumb.
What explain? the question is in the OP.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:52 pm to LakeViewLSU
Athletic curricula? That's a new one.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:53 pm to LakeViewLSU
quote:
Wow, you actually gave your opinion to answer the question. Thanks.
I had to look this up, but its important.
Bear Bryant's top salary was $450,000. Yes, that was a lot of money in 1983, but its really only equal to about $1.6 million today. That's what a decent coordinator in the SEC makes.
The money in college football is out of control and I really believe its a bubble that is going to burst. The networks overpaid for the TV coverage and its going to bite them hard around 2024-26- something will have to give at that point.
Another hard example. 12 years ago, Mississippi State's athletic revenue was around $18 million. They will hit $100 million in 2019. And they are last by a good margin in the SEC.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 9:56 pm to anc
quote:
The networks overpaid for the TV coverage and its going to bite them hard around 2024-26- something will have to give at that point.
I would hope that they aren't budgeting too far beyond known revenue producing contracts. I also think that many of these huge contracts for coaches many be backed by pledges from boosters.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 10:02 pm to LakeViewLSU
quote:
I would hope that they aren't budgeting too far beyond known revenue producing contracts. I also think that many of these huge contracts for coaches many be backed by pledges from boosters.
2 points.
ESPN is dying a slow death. They overpaid for everything they have and can't afford it. It doesn't help that Disney is politicizing their non-live sports and essentially curling off a major profit center.
Generation X is about to be in the highly targeted group for giving - and they give about 35% less than the Boomers that are starting to die. In the next 10 years, they'll be some major money left to universities and athletic departments, but after that it will start to dry out. My generation doesn't give two shits about having their name on anything. We look out for ourselves.
Generation Y isn't building wealth. They are living I the moment. I suspect this will change, but their addition to experiences won't translate to the current model of some guy giving a million bucks to have the visitor locker room named after him.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 10:10 pm to anc
Their business model will definitely have to evolve.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 10:16 pm to LakeViewLSU
I went to school with a future NBA player. he could not play Scrabble.
cat and rat.
He graduated. How?
Posted on 12/4/17 at 10:17 pm to LakeViewLSU
quote:
Their business model will definitely have to evolve.
academia doesn't know what the word evolve means.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 10:34 pm to LakeViewLSU
I agree with anc about the legacy of athletics in higher education. It grew out of the post-Civil War and Progressive eras when athletics was viewed as part of a well-rounded education. At some point, the athletic side of major state universities (and some private schools) became semi-autonomous and relatively disconnected from the academic and intellectual experience of college.
IMO, we are witnessing the peak of CFB and college sports, more generally. The CTE stuff is more serious than most people realize. The game will be gradually eroded from the bottom up. It won't happen tomorrow, but before too long we will cross some kind of threshold where high schools no longer sponsor football due to legal liability. If (and when) that happens, CFB is dead in the water.
I don't know how old you are. But if you are younger than 40 or so, you may witness the decline of college sports in your lifetime.
IMO, we are witnessing the peak of CFB and college sports, more generally. The CTE stuff is more serious than most people realize. The game will be gradually eroded from the bottom up. It won't happen tomorrow, but before too long we will cross some kind of threshold where high schools no longer sponsor football due to legal liability. If (and when) that happens, CFB is dead in the water.
I don't know how old you are. But if you are younger than 40 or so, you may witness the decline of college sports in your lifetime.
Posted on 12/4/17 at 11:55 pm to LakeViewLSU
Honest question.
Would a student at Julliard get kicked out for making money off of his image or talents outside of school?
Would a student at Julliard get kicked out for making money off of his image or talents outside of school?
Posted on 12/5/17 at 4:03 am to CroakaBait
quote:
You, my friend, sound like you have the aura of someone who has previously gone hot air ballooning.
That thread is going to follow him for the rest of his TD tenure.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 5:03 am to LakeViewLSU
I don't get the harsh reactions to the postulate.
I would say football is more like a trade school bolted onto a university.
It wouldn't make much sense to require a guy wanting to be a mechanic to go to basic core college classes either.
Big time football players should be called athlete-students rather than student-athletes
I would say football is more like a trade school bolted onto a university.
It wouldn't make much sense to require a guy wanting to be a mechanic to go to basic core college classes either.
Big time football players should be called athlete-students rather than student-athletes
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News