This was in the daily today, Morons.

Donate To GopherHole

That letter and the responses that support it are classic U of Minnesota. To be sure, there is a huge anti-sports sentiment for many at the U.
 

The letter writer is bitter because her Philosophy teaching only nets her $45k/year at the U (state salary database showed her at $40,602 as of 06-07 school year).
 

This along with LOLla mohammed nur's editorials i just cannot stand. theyre just ignorant. and arrogant. and selfish. 'driven to discover' limited to the sciences? well yea. by definition. theres only so many ways you can write an essay, or a poem, or an annoying editorial, and theyve probably all been discovered already. john q taxpayer wants to fund research into things that might actually improve the world, not your 'sabbatical' to research 'yourself'. makes me sick reading these that people actually think this way, and moreso that they actually got printed.

they need to understand that without the athletics programs, they aint going to be cutting IT programs first when they run out of money....
 

Actually a lot of athletics programs nation wide are in the red. If the Gophers are making money, and whether you trust their accounting is your decision, they're in the minority. The usual argument is the prestige helps the school draw in donations to offset the loss which is a pretty tenuous argument.
 


There are far more schools in the United States that have tiny athletic depts than those that sponsor BCS level competition.

Why doesn't she go work at Hamline or Augsburg if it's such a big deal to her.

Luckily, the richest and most powerful alumni generally love sports. It's the $35,000 liberal weenies that write letters to the editors that don't.
 

pretty certain that by state law, all state schools must be self funded without taxpayer support, which means the revenue sports foot the bill for all the others. also means all the complaining teachers salaries are totally unaffected by athletic programs as they are financially separate. no doubt the success of athletics are the public face of the U and have an impact on donations and thus on pay and scollies (non-athletic). down grading sports will create a University of Chicago, which is still a Big Ten school (one of the founding members) yet has no athletics but a low scale of grant research compared to the U.
 

NateDawgUM said:
There are far more schools in the United States that have tiny athletic depts than those that sponsor BCS level competition.

Why doesn't she go work at Hamline or Augsburg if it's such a big deal to her.

Luckily, the richest and most powerful alumni generally love sports. It's the $35,000 liberal weenies that write letters to the editors that don't.
Click to expand...

I disagree with Judy Grandbois ideas about the place of athletics at the University. However, your contention that the size of one's paycheck dictates who is right and who is wrong is , to put it delicately, a crock of #%#*.
 




This is when Prexy B or Macturi should point out how much the fundraising for TCF Bank Stadium simultaneously raised for U of M academic programs. The U asked all major donors to give a gift to support the academic mission of the University while writing the check for the stadium. Our University is better off because of athletics and we can actually show that directly through the donations.
 

grunkiejr said:
This is when Prexy B or Macturi should point out how much the fundraising for TCF Bank Stadium simultaneously raised for U of M academic programs. The U asked all major donors to give a gift to support the academic mission of the University while writing the check for the stadium. Our University is better off because of athletics and we can actually show that directly through the donations.
Click to expand...

Great point.
 

phipedes said:
I disagree with Judy Grandbois ideas about the place of athletics at the University. However, your contention that the size of one's paycheck dictates who is right and who is wrong is , to put it delicately, a crock of #%#*.
Click to expand...

But many times.. The size of one's income can very well dictate who is right and who is wrong. Just depends on what.
 

Formo said:
But many times.. The size of one's income can very well dictate who is right and who is wrong. Just depends on what.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly, like with Bernie Madoff or Denny Hecker. Wealth guarantees solid judgment and a sound moral compass.
 



phipedes said:
I agree wholeheartedly, like with Bernie Madoff or Denny Hecker. Wealth guarantees solid judgment and a sound moral compass.
Click to expand...

Ohhh, name dropping! Good job!

You realize they aren't the only rich people around these days, right? Just because the media doesn't like the rich folk, doesn't mean you have to adhere to the same philosophy. It's ok to think on your own.

Oh, by the way, you brought up the guarantee, not I.
 


Formo said:
Ohhh, name dropping! Good job!

You realize they aren't the only rich people around these days, right? Just because the media doesn't like the rich folk, doesn't mean you have to adhere to the same philosophy. It's ok to think on your own.

Oh, by the way, you brought up the guarantee, not I.
Click to expand...

The media doesn't like rich people? Where did you get that idea? Saying that being rich does not make you a fountain of virtue is not the same by any means as disliking rich people.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom