Obviously she ain't too good at math or she's just not presenting the entire big picture...$1,000,000/30,000 students = $33/student
[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;210215]Thatâd be nice, but I donât want to have to put âPat Yasinskas covers the Panthers for The Observer, and has since 1999â under each thing he writes. We could put actual news in that space.
Just write a letter, put in whatever âfactsâ you want, and perhaps itâll get published.
Name-calling and questioning her credentials without checking them probably wonât get you far.[/QUOTE]
I didnât name call. ???
of course when Pat writes we know his perspective, its in the sports page!
how am I/we supposed to know she focuses on higher ed?? go look at my November paper?
Like I said, if you are the higher ed specialist, then it should be noted somewhere, otherwise her voice has no juice behind it. And for the record, every paper I have ever seen has a small blip by their email stating their role, ie: John Doe is a religous writer for the NY times. Otherwise readers look at and say âwhat gives her the rightâ like I did immediately when I read it. Had it been noted in the piece she is the higher ed person, then Iâd taken her more seriously.
[QUOTE=49erPress;210216]donât be retarded. she lives in charlotte and cares about unc charlotte and that affords her the right to an opinion about the school. i donât agree with her opinion but if charlotte has any hope of getting football then weâll need community support. if you want to respond to her, find someone who is articulate enough to carry our message without sounding like theyâre a kid who just lost their toy and letâs respond with a letter or an op-ed.[/QUOTE]
Everyone has a right to their opinion, I just like to make sure that the ones I listen to are from someone atleast approaching an expert status on the topic they cover.
As for her concern about our university, I think herâs is at the same level as most of this communitiesâ; virtually non exsistant. She just feels strongly about college sports in general and weâve convinently given her a storyline to debate with.
[QUOTE=metro;210221]⌠it should be noted somewhere, otherwise her voice has no juice behind it. [/QUOTE]
If her voice has no juice behind it, you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;210224]If her voice has no juice behind it, you have absolutely nothing to worry about.[/QUOTE]
Lets hope you are both right on that one.
[QUOTE=49erPress;210220]the figure she used doesnât include money to build a stadium, create and maintain additional womenâs teams, etc⌠previous estimates concerning a rise in student fees related to the addition of football are closer to $200 a student per semester increase and that was in '99.[/QUOTE]
myth: student fees donât completely subsidize NCAA football or athletics for that matter.
fact: current baseball stadium funding is $5 million from a private individual.
myth: we donât have a football stadium
fact: yes we do. The Belk Track would be a great spot, it would require some expansion and upgrade, but it would be servicable and on campus.
[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;210224]If her voice has no juice behind it, you have absolutely nothing to worry about.[/QUOTE]
whatever you say smarty pants, I am just telling you if someone writes and op-ed, it usually helps if there is some reference to what the authorâs specialty is. (w/o going back to Novermber to find it)
myth: student fees don't completely subsidize NCAA football or athletics for that matter.fact: current baseball stadium funding is $5 million from a private individual.
myth: we donât have a football stadium
fact: yes we do. The Belk Track would be a great spot, it would require some expansion and upgrade, but it would be servicable and on campus.
fact: most of the belk track is in a flood plain.
fact: div-1A requires a stadium that seats 30,000 people
[QUOTE=49erPress;210232]fact: most of the belk track is in a flood plain.
fact: div-1A requires a stadium that seats 30,000 people[/QUOTE]
lol, so comical I wonât respond
[b]FICTION[/b][B]:[/B] div-1A requires a stadium that seats 30,000 people
FIXED.
Iâve never been dead (much to some peopleâs dismay) but that doesnât mean I couldnât write an obituary.
Sheâs obviously someone who believes education takes a priority over sports, I donât disagree. But where I do disagree is that academics would suffer if we began to pursue football. Thereâs nothing to suggest that would be the case, the benefits to adding football are far greater than not.
Her opinion isnât a personal swipe at us, therefore our rebuttals shouldnât be either.
[QUOTE=49erPress;210220]the figure she used doesnât include money to build a stadium, create and maintain additional womenâs teams, etc⌠previous estimates concerning a rise in student fees related to the addition of football are closer to $200 a student per semester increase and that was in '99.[/QUOTE]
When I said that I was merely stating that multiples of [I]millions [/I]in dollars isnât so much with that many students⌠I know it takes more than a million dollars.
[QUOTE=49erPress;210232]fact: my posts rarely make any sense[/QUOTE]
agreed
I think not confronting an issue for fear of failure is cowardly, and I stand by that.
Furthermore:
It's a pivotal one for the state's fourth-largest university, a campus in search of a [B]strong identity[/B] among its peers in the state and nation.A high-profile (note those words, please) football program brings a host of benefits to a university, including [B]good feelings, happy alumni[/B] and [B]free publicity[/B].
Did she did not disprove her whole point by stating this?
Yet winning college programs consume huge amounts of [B]money and campus support[/B]. When you're UNCC -- a young public university forecast to add 12,000 more students in a little over a decade -- kicking off football right now could be a fool's mission.
We have support (except maybe Ms. Schulken). The money issue she keeps harping on is ridiculous. You cannot only focus on the COSTS without exploring the BENEFITS. Higher education itself is extremely costly. UNC Charlotte costs hundreds of millions of dollars to run⌠Boy, thatâs really expensive. Should we, Ms. Schulken, shut down the university because it is vastly expensive??
Now, I could leave it at that but you wouldnât get the whole picture. The benefits that having a university like UNC Charlotte provides greatly outweigh that cost in terms of economic impact, community development, higher standards of living, etc.
Yet it takes an astounding amount of money to build a football team. The San Antonio Express-News reported it would cost between $12 million and $25 million to start a football program at the University of Texas at San Antonio. A Division I-AA team would cost $3 million a year to operate, the campus estimated, while a Division I-A team would cost between $5 million and $7 million.
Once again, no mention of benefit⌠only costs. I suppose she should not have purchased a house because of how expensive it is.
[B][B]Bust the myths[/B] Here's the nasty little secret of college football: At UNCC -- like UTSA -- much of the millions to support it would come from a mandatory student athletic fee. [/B][B]
That is not nasty, and itâs not a little âsecret.â Who in the world does not know that students pay for football and all other athletic activities out of student fees? They also pay lab fees, administrative fees, parking, etc⌠That is because of the BENEFIT it provides.
Characterizing student fees for athletics as something that is nasty is not very professional in my opinion. You can tell how she feels about ALL student athletics in general by this characterization.[/B]
[B][B]Reality No. 1: [/B]According to the NCAA, nearly all the top 25 football schools reported a surplus for football during 2004-2005. Yet the required method of reporting means millions of dollars in student fees or university support often show up as revenue. Also, athletic budgets often do not include big football costs such as stadium construction and debt service. [/B][B]
So what??? They obviously believe itâs worth the cost. There are more benefits to a university than athletic revenue by having an athletic program. Can you speak to those please?
[B][B]Reality No. 2:[/B] Successful football programs can be [I]revenue-generators [/I]by bringing in dollars from television contracts and bowl appearances. But that doesn't mean they [I]make[/I] money. A 2003 NCAA study determined that for every dollar spent on college football or basketball, only one dollar is generated in additional revenues. [/B][B]
Letâs also take into consideration the revenue that is generated by people who pay tuition at a school that has football because they would not attend the school if they did not have the sport. Also, the revenue the school gets from increased applicants from the P.R. The increased selectivity the school is able to engage in, increase in prestige, etcâŚ!
By the way if one dollar is generated in revenue for every dollar spent on football, letâs start a program now⌠We could get a team, break exactly even every year, AND have the benefits of the experience, the p.r, __________ (fill in blank)âŚ
[B][B]Reality: [/B]Quantity doesn't mean quality, and nobody keeps track of how many applicants sign on at colleges. Also, last year the NCAA released a study that found no evidence showing that increased athletic spending generates additional profit. [/B][B]
So, since nobody keeps track of how many and, thus, there is lack of evidence, that somehow proves/supports your point? Because there are no studies on the issue (because the outcome is soooo obvious you donât NEED a freakinâ study). And, theyâre talking about athletic programs generating additional profit⌠THIS is NOT why schools have football, Ms. Schulken.
Can you measure school pride/spirit? Can you measure loyalty? Can you measure the benefits of the experiences gained by having college football on campus? Can you measure the OTHER factors besides just whether or not the athletic department makes a profit? Did they look for evidence like that?
Think about where Notre Dame would be right now if the had NEVER had football⌠or Michigan, or Stanford⌠etc.
Guess what? Since there is lack of evidence to the contrary that I am the greatest lover of all time, I am just going to go ahead and accept it as truth.
Also, there is no evidence that aliens donât visit my backyard at night. I am going to sit outside this evening and ask them if I can ride in their spaceship.
[/B][/B][/B]
When I said that I was merely stating that multiples of [I]millions [/I]in dollars isn't so much with that many students... I know it takes more than a million dollars.
oh, i know. that wasnât a jab at you. i just think its something that we need to keep in mind. when student fees are likely to rise close to $500 per student per year, weâre going to get some heat. if the study comes back and says now isnât the time for football i predict it will be for two reasons: 1) not the right time considering the universities other priorities 2) increases in student fees will disinfranchise too many students.
Please keep personal attacks at each other out of this thread.
Please keep personal attacks at each other out of this thread.Why don't you shut up, Gill. You're such a jerk.
agreed
first, if iâm wrong. show me iâm wrong. if you do, iâll be the first to admit it. second, iâm not wrong about the belk track. there are severe limits on what the university can build in that area. hence, we have no major facilities or have planned major facilities in or around the belk track. after ecu was flooded in the 90s, the state strengthened laws regulating where state institutions could build. check the master plan. also, woodward told sga in the late 90s there was land set aside on the other side of mallard creek road that was ideal for a football stadium.
[QUOTE=metro;210221]I didnât name call. ???
[/QUOTE]
Not you. Others in this thread. Although you did call me âsmarty pants.â Ha.
If youâre starting ANY college atheltic program to generate revenue then you would be a dumb ass!
Football is needed to improve campus life, generate community and alumni support, and to protect the financial viablity of the Atheltic Department.
These reasons alone are enough to add it!
If we followed her opinion, we should only have Menâs Basketball, its the only one that pays for itself. Lord only knows the olympic sports are financial blackholes, but we have to have thoseâŚright?