Yabadabadoo
Well-known member
Here: http://trib.com/opinion/columns/groose-good-news-bad-news-on-uw/article_47dc26de-00b0-54e1-81e1-35e43c4bb0cc.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
Wyo Professor: The MVC & Big Sky Conference would want us!
- Thread starter Yabadabadoo
- Start date
Jesus.. Groose is kind of an idiot, and Tom Burman nailed his ass to the wall in the comments section. That was everything I could have hoped for.
Yabadabadoo
Well-known member
MrTitleist said:
He did -- and I'm surprised that Burman didn't answer him in regard to dropping down a level.
Ridiculous.
WestWYOPoke
Well-known member
I Hope his sections regarding academic, legislature and infrastructure were more accurate than his section discussing athletics. Outside of the football team's record almost everything he said was misguided or outright false.
BeaverPoke
Well-known member
Wow, he seriously took the USA Today "Final Grades for All 128 FBS Teams" article and thought the D- was their average grade?
Alabama got an A+
If he for one millisecond believes that Alabama football players could AVERAGE an A+ then he shows he has very limited knowledge of how college athletics work.
Alabama got an A+
If he for one millisecond believes that Alabama football players could AVERAGE an A+ then he shows he has very limited knowledge of how college athletics work.
joshvanklomp
Well-known member
As a sportswriter, I can say that this was one of the worst-written columns I've ever read.
LanderPoke
Well-known member
This guy's an idiot.
WYOBISONMAN
Well-known member
Who the hell is he?
It would be nice if Burman would go forward and write up an opinion of his own addressing:
1.) The 8 million matching funds (potentially 16 million) and what it will do for our program
2.) UW has a budget around $530 million per year. Athletics is around $32 million of that. A good chunk of that is earned on its own - I'm not sure UW does much in terms of subsidies for athletics.
3.) Dropping to FCS is nonsense - unless you just want to weaken the university more.
Other than that - the article was tough to read. Good News! Bad News! Good News! Bad News! Lah-de-fucking-dah
I do respect that he admitted he was wrong in the comments. I don't trust any of the data in the article though.
1.) The 8 million matching funds (potentially 16 million) and what it will do for our program
2.) UW has a budget around $530 million per year. Athletics is around $32 million of that. A good chunk of that is earned on its own - I'm not sure UW does much in terms of subsidies for athletics.
3.) Dropping to FCS is nonsense - unless you just want to weaken the university more.
Other than that - the article was tough to read. Good News! Bad News! Good News! Bad News! Lah-de-fucking-dah
I do respect that he admitted he was wrong in the comments. I don't trust any of the data in the article though.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
WyoBrandX said:
Exactly. Burman needs to clearly articulate how much of University or State budgets are spent on athletics. Of that money, what is a reasonable advertisement value (or other value) to place on it.
With tightening budgets, the rumble about spending on athletics will continue and evolve to a roar.
One of my biggest beefs with Burman is that he does not clearly lay out the financial impacts of athletics and what the University gets in return. I get the whole student athlete experience thing, but, honestly, there needs to be more, and I think there is, to justify the spending.
WYOBISONMAN
Well-known member
I think the biggest impact of athletics to any university is the national exposure and advertising that a school gets from it. Also, a part of it is how central it is to creating a campus atmosphere for the students. Honestly, as a parent of UW students, I am more concerned about the experience and education my kids get than the student athletes' experience. But, there has to be something positive to get those recruits to attend.
I am not a believer that spending on athletics has a negative effect of academic spending, but on the contrary, well spent money in athletics that creates a winning program, develops a loyal fan base and keeps alumni tied to the university will result in better donations and easier fundraising for the academic side as well.
I am not a believer that spending on athletics has a negative effect of academic spending, but on the contrary, well spent money in athletics that creates a winning program, develops a loyal fan base and keeps alumni tied to the university will result in better donations and easier fundraising for the academic side as well.
Bad news: This guy can't write. It's a wonder he made it through a basic college English course with that kind of writing style.
Good news: He's right on the academic, infrastructure, and legislature side of things for the most part.
Bad news: He's completely wrong on football, especially regarding dropping to FCS. We all know that.
Good news: This guy holds no sway over anyone, nor power over any decision making body. It's all just a bunch of hot air on a page.
GO POKES!
Good news: He's right on the academic, infrastructure, and legislature side of things for the most part.
Bad news: He's completely wrong on football, especially regarding dropping to FCS. We all know that.
Good news: This guy holds no sway over anyone, nor power over any decision making body. It's all just a bunch of hot air on a page.
GO POKES!
J-Rod
Well-known member
I get the media's role in all this, but the local papers need to quit giving these idiots a platform. This topic comes up 1-2 times every off-season via the newspaper. Every school in the country has those fringe "let's drop sports and emphasize academics more" folks or in this case, the FCS truthers, but few are actually given an opportunity to make it public. Give it up.
J-Rod said:
Even the University of Oklahoma had them during it's really horrible period (1995-1998; best years of my life here IMHO). Heard one caller on the local sports radio suggest dropping football and adding hockey since it was a popular winter sport down here at the time.
BackHarlowRoad
Well-known member
J-Rod said:
Even idiots are entitled to an opinion and a platform.
TracyRingolsby
Well-known member
WyoBrandX said:
The $8 million is two years at $4 million a year, so it is not potentially $16 million.
The UW budget, as you pointed out is 6 percent of the university budget. The CJC raises more than $5 million of department money (before any matching fund). As for the building of various facilities, the athletic department has to have the project fully funded before it can move forward. There are no lingering debts or bond issues, like the $240 million bond issue CSU will use to build its football stadium, which creates a drain on the University's borrowing abilities.
Maybe at heart he is "A Ram through and through,'' just like the new President he is so excited about. I guess that oversight shows his lack of any understanding of the athletic world.
kansasCowboy
Well-known member
TracyRingolsby said:
Fully funded??? Like the AA renovations?
