New Article on Football

Savio · January 12, 2007, 1:55am

Sure thing, man. I agree. But, other people are allowed to have opinions as well... including negative opinions about her opinion. If not, then it's hypocritical.

having an opinion is one thing and trying to talk down to someone is another to make yourself, in this case ourselves, feel better is not the way to go.

At least she wrote about us and she knows it’s a growing concern/issue (since she is apprently against it). That’s important. It gets everything out there on the table so everyone can make a decision whether it be for or against.

I’m just one of those people who think the Charlotte Observer isn’t that bad and neither are the people who write the articles…

Savio · January 12, 2007, 2:04am

Why would you send her a link to this thread? Everyone is acting like a child, calling names but providing no facts. That's not the way to combat people who don't agree with you.
Calling her a bitch, saying it’s editorial at best, lame ass, etc. … tha’ts not the way to go about this.

She presents some solid facts. Her myths and realities are right on, now its our (your) job to point out to her other positives that outweigh her realities and make football a positive for Charlotte.

She is not the first, nor will she be the last to say that this is not a good idea, so get your arguments straight and get prepared.

I must not have seen this…but yes…what Brick said :silly:

NinerATL2CHA · January 12, 2007, 2:11am

having an opinion is one thing and trying to talk down to someone is another to make yourself, in this case ourselves, feel better is not the way to go.
I’m just one of those people who think the Charlotte Observer isn’t that bad and neither are the people who write the articles…

I agree, name-calling, is wrong… of course. However, I am glad that college football has so many passionate supporters at UNC Charlotte and within the community. Method may sometimes get off track but I like the madness.

I also don’t think the O. is bad. I do, however, totally disagree with her. (see earlier post for breakdown) And, newspapers are not one person. There are many different, varying opinions among the writers, I’m sure.

I don’t think she thought of all the possibilities nor examined every aspect of the situation before putting pen to paper. There were huge voids and gaps in reasoning. That’s what fueled my fire. At least take some time to more carefully examine an issue… especially one that means so much to so many people here.

system · January 12, 2007, 2:18am

[QUOTE=Ninerballin;210320]Amen, I wonder how much money the Library generates each year? Want to get rid of it?
I wonder how long it will take the new student union center to pay for itself? My guess a while
Same can be dealt to many other activites/buildings on campus. Just because they don’t generate revenue for the school doesn’t mean we should just not have them or do away with them.

How about something that does generate most the revenue for this campus, STUDENTS/ALUMNI. How about starting football for them, since it is them who make this campus go, not the chancellor, AD, etc. I know they are important but the students/alumni is what makes a university a university.[/QUOTE]

DOBA

this woman hides behind many cloaks in her argument of football

she really could of just written one sentence, “I hate sports and all money should go to academia.”

ninerID · January 12, 2007, 2:27am

A great response from the John Locke Foundation:

[URL=http://charlotte.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1132]http://charlotte.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1132[/URL]

[B][URL=http://charlotte.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1132][COLOR=seagreen]The War on UNCC Football[/COLOR][/URL][/B]

[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2][COLOR=#777777]Posted January 11th, 2007 at 4:00 PM by Jeff Taylor[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]
I wondered how long it would take the Uptown crowd to realize that momentum for football at UNCC is picking up steam and that football endangers their vision of an urban University of Charlotte anchoring both ends of a light rail line. Well, wonder no more.

Mary Schulken’s [URL=http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/opinion/16432583.htm][COLOR=#0066cc]ode to football inaction[/COLOR][/URL] proves the forces of Darkness are on the march.

See, the Uptown crowd cannot have students and alumni drive the future of what happens to UNCC as that might not comport with Uptown visions. In 2007 that vision includes plopping a med school in Charlotte for no other reason than it does not have one and continuing to yoke UNCC to a transit dependent growth plan. (There’s a reason UNCC suddenly got a $45 million building Uptown — choo-choo!)

But Schulken does not seem to understand that UNCC’s sporting [I]status quo[/I] cannot stand. Playing A10 basketball is not going to fill the stands or entice alumni to give to the school, the holy grail of all college athletic programs. (Nevermind the way the 6-8 49ers have been playing this season.) More likely is a continued reliance on student fees to fund the athletic department, perhaps even an increase.

The [I]Indy Star[/I] [URL=http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/expense_stat/show?school_id=72][COLOR=#0066cc]database[/COLOR][/URL] we’ve cited before shows that for 2004-05, UNCC used $6.1 million in student fees to supply 60 percent of its $10.1 million athletic budget. Thanks to another $1 million in NCAA tourney money and another $850,000 in other institutional money, the 49er sports effort was some $474,000 in the black overall.

But here is the scary thing, the flagship revenue sport, men’s basketball, was only $293,000 in the black. That is skirting it close to the edge, especially considering that from 03-05 the Niners won 42 games and generated a ton of excitement in the program playing Conference USA rivals Cincinnati and Louisville. Yet ticket sales, contributions, sponsorships, and ad revenue still barely nicked the $1 million mark.

As a result, AD Judy Rose is now banking that the A10 can put enough teams in the NCAAs year after year to make her budget work while UNCC hosts games with the likes of St. Bonaventure and Fordham. Good plan.

Finally, I have no idea what Schulken means when she says that athletic success does not attract students and boosters. George Mason saw its applicant pool surge after its run to the Final Four last year. Why, [URL=http://gazette.gmu.edu/articles/9505/][COLOR=#0066cc]here’s a story[/COLOR][/URL] from the other day: With the freshman application deadline for Fall 2007 coming up on Jan. 15, Mason is in the midst of its first post-Final Four application season.
Each year, Mason’s Admissions Office receives far more qualified applications than can be accommodated, and the application number has been surging. Mason also saw a large spike in the number of students agreeing to attend.
“This is a good problem to have,” says Andrew Flagel, dean of admissions. “There’s no doubt that being in the Final Four really accelerated that trajectory in a way that none of us could really have anticipated.”
Flagel says the size of campus tours has doubled and oftentimes tripled since last April; not to mention a noticeable increase in phone calls, e-mails and general inquiries.
“We’ve moved,” explains Flagel, “from so-to-speak ‘weeding out’ the students who were unqualified to choosing from among well-qualified students.”

And I guarantee Boise State will see similar positive fallout from its just-concluded undefeated football season. Athletics are a huge marketing arm for higher education. Perhaps they should not be and surely a sports team has little connection to the quality of education an institution might offer, but, hey, that’s marketing — loud, crass, crude, and often dumb.

But if UNCC wants to be able to market itself in 2020 as something besides a remedial destination for CMS grads, maybe a campus with a couple train stations, and med school grafted on top, school officials better start listening to alumni and students and look seriously at the football option before it is too late.

NinerATL2CHA · January 12, 2007, 2:36am

A great response from the John Locke Foundation:
http://charlotte.johnlocke.org/blog/?p=1132

[COLOR=seagreen]The War on UNCC Football[/COLOR]

[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2][COLOR=#777777]Posted January 11th, 2007 at 4:00 PM by Jeff Taylor[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]
I wondered how long it would take the Uptown crowd to realize that momentum for football at UNCC is picking up steam and that football endangers their vision of an urban University of Charlotte anchoring both ends of a light rail line. Well, wonder no more.

Mary Schulken’s [COLOR=#0066cc]ode to football inaction[/COLOR] proves the forces of Darkness are on the march.

See, the Uptown crowd cannot have students and alumni drive the future of what happens to UNCC as that might not comport with Uptown visions. In 2007 that vision includes plopping a med school in Charlotte for no other reason than it does not have one and continuing to yoke UNCC to a transit dependent growth plan. (There’s a reason UNCC suddenly got a $45 million building Uptown — choo-choo!)

But Schulken does not seem to understand that UNCC’s sporting status quo cannot stand. Playing A10 basketball is not going to fill the stands or entice alumni to give to the school, the holy grail of all college athletic programs. (Nevermind the way the 6-8 49ers have been playing this season.) More likely is a continued reliance on student fees to fund the athletic department, perhaps even an increase.

The Indy Star [COLOR=#0066cc]database[/COLOR] we’ve cited before shows that for 2004-05, UNCC used $6.1 million in student fees to supply 60 percent of its $10.1 million athletic budget. Thanks to another $1 million in NCAA tourney money and another $850,000 in other institutional money, the 49er sports effort was some $474,000 in the black overall.

But here is the scary thing, the flagship revenue sport, men’s basketball, was only $293,000 in the black. That is skirting it close to the edge, especially considering that from 03-05 the Niners won 42 games and generated a ton of excitement in the program playing Conference USA rivals Cincinnati and Louisville. Yet ticket sales, contributions, sponsorships, and ad revenue still barely nicked the $1 million mark.

As a result, AD Judy Rose is now banking that the A10 can put enough teams in the NCAAs year after year to make her budget work while UNCC hosts games with the likes of St. Bonaventure and Fordham. Good plan.

Finally, I have no idea what Schulken means when she says that athletic success does not attract students and boosters. George Mason saw its applicant pool surge after its run to the Final Four last year. Why, [COLOR=#0066cc]here’s a story[/COLOR] from the other day: With the freshman application deadline for Fall 2007 coming up on Jan. 15, Mason is in the midst of its first post-Final Four application season.
Each year, Mason’s Admissions Office receives far more qualified applications than can be accommodated, and the application number has been surging. Mason also saw a large spike in the number of students agreeing to attend.
“This is a good problem to have,” says Andrew Flagel, dean of admissions. “There’s no doubt that being in the Final Four really accelerated that trajectory in a way that none of us could really have anticipated.”
Flagel says the size of campus tours has doubled and oftentimes tripled since last April; not to mention a noticeable increase in phone calls, e-mails and general inquiries.
“We’ve moved,” explains Flagel, “from so-to-speak ‘weeding out’ the students who were unqualified to choosing from among well-qualified students.”

And I guarantee Boise State will see similar positive fallout from its just-concluded undefeated football season. Athletics are a huge marketing arm for higher education. Perhaps they should not be and surely a sports team has little connection to the quality of education an institution might offer, but, hey, that’s marketing — loud, crass, crude, and often dumb.

But if UNCC wants to be able to market itself in 2020 as something besides a remedial destination for CMS grads, maybe a campus with a couple train stations, and med school grafted on top, school officials better start listening to alumni and students and look seriously at the football option before it is too late.

Great article (good find, ID… thx).
A lot of great points… makes much more sense than Ms. Schulken’s article. Perhaps she should sit down with these kind folks for a while.

Does anyone else, however get the feeling that the author (or authors) are confusing the med school that Chapel Hill wants to put here with UNC Charlotte?

Savio · January 12, 2007, 2:43am

nice find!

system · January 12, 2007, 3:07am

[QUOTE]quote from the John Locke Foundation:
As a result, AD Judy Rose is now banking that the A10 can put enough teams in the NCAAs year after year to make her budget work while UNCC hosts games with the likes of St. Bonaventure and Fordham. Good plan.[/QUOTE]

boo-yahh

Over40NINER · January 12, 2007, 3:46am

[QUOTE=Savio;210382]
I’m just one of those people who think the Charlotte Observer isn’t that bad and neither are the people who write the articles…
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think this is about the Observer.

This is about one person’s opinion, and we all know the old saying about opinions. As I stated in an earlier post, hopefully the Observer will allow a counterpoint article…I mean “editorial”.

We might as well get used to this. The closer football comes to being a reality, the more negative press it will receive by its opponents (and no, that is not a cut on the Observer).

Ninerballin · January 12, 2007, 6:03am

Great Article by Jeff on the Locke Foundation. Mary’s comments were pretty stupid considering the fact she gave no source to the study on the so called myth about student and booster support. Also, her Reality on that one didn’t make no sense at all since she gave personal opinion to support her claim, I’m sorry but I look at Wake Football and she can’t tell me that athletics such as football doesn’t increase the support (both in attendance and donations) to the school.

Mike, she might be an expert in higher learning, but she has NO damn clue what she’s talking about when it comes to sports/$$$. She talks about how it will take student dollars to start the team, but she doesn’t even state the fact that almost every other school in the state of NC does this and they never receive a drop in applications because of student fees because of their football team.

This article is a “editorial” is a complete joke and undermining attempt which states little facts of relevance. She states figures about what it would take to start up a team, but she doesn’t realize the type of money a university of our size has running through it every year. Of course when you talk about something the government or the school is building like light rail that is “beneficial to the people” but costs 100 times more than a football program, people don’t want to oppose. Kind of funny don’t you think?

719er · January 12, 2007, 6:40am

Really nice post by the Locke Foundation.
I googled Mary…she grew up in eastern NC and graduated from ECU.
I sent her an e-mail tonight after thinking about her opinion in the Big 0 Thursday.
Believe I went too deep in my rant about east/west rivalry in the state. Gave Dubois
a pass, but I hope he sees it (I copied him anyway). Still, if anyone has a friend or
acquaintance much east of CLT, you know what I’m talking about. The closest we
come to positive press outside a 35 mile radius is Winston-Salem.
Anyway, I agree the way to approach the negativity towards all things Charlotte is
to present the facts, not the Donald/Rosie approach.
BTW, I referred to the future U of C as North Carolina Charlotte. I’m all for the name
change, but one battle at a time.

NinerATL2CHA · January 12, 2007, 2:00pm

Really nice post by the Locke Foundation. I googled Mary....she grew up in eastern NC and graduated from ECU. I sent her an e-mail tonight after thinking about her opinion in the Big 0 Thursday. Believe I went too deep in my rant about east/west rivalry in the state. Gave Dubois a pass, but I hope he sees it (I copied him anyway). Still, if anyone has a friend or acquaintance much east of CLT, you know what I'm talking about. The closest we come to positive press outside a 35 mile radius is Winston-Salem. Anyway, I agree the way to approach the negativity towards all things Charlotte is to present the facts, not the Donald/Rosie approach. BTW, I referred to the future U of C as North Carolina Charlotte. I'm all for the name change, but one battle at a time.

That’s one of the best, most thought-out, well-written letters I have ever seen on the issue.

Excellent work.

system · January 12, 2007, 5:00pm

BEA UTIFUL article~!

49erPress · January 12, 2007, 5:11pm

i love it.

Over40NINER · January 12, 2007, 6:00pm

Great article by Locke. But how many people will read it?

Maybe the Observer can mention some of that same stuff when it runs its counterpoint to this latest editorial (which I assume it will do).

Over40NINER · January 12, 2007, 6:01pm

double post.

casstommy · January 12, 2007, 6:09pm

[QUOTE=stonecoldken;210363]Dear Mr. Persinger,
Please tell that trouble-making Bit** in the Opinion dept. to mind her own damn business![/QUOTE]

Take that Mary!

Mike_Persinger · January 12, 2007, 6:27pm

[QUOTE=Over40NINER;210487]Great article by Locke. But how many people will read it?

Maybe the Observer can mention some of that same stuff when it runs its counterpoint to this latest editorial (which I assume it will do).[/QUOTE]

Might be nice if someone wrote even a letter as a counterpoint. Our letters editor, Lew Powell, told me he got exactly one letter on the topic yesterday.

Jimmyhat49er · January 12, 2007, 6:28pm

Stonecoldken is our own Dwight Shrute…

Jimmyhat49er · January 12, 2007, 6:37pm

[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;210495]Might be nice if someone wrote even a letter as a counterpoint. Our letters editor, Lew Powell, told me he got exactly one letter on the topic yesterday.[/QUOTE]
Could you post his email address??