Wes Pedersen (5/07):
It's a given that college presidents and professors should be far better paid than most are today. But sports brings in the big bucks because there are coaches out there who can whip players into winners in short time and fans into cough-it-up frenzies. The system is unfair, but it is not going to change. Let's fret about something else, like possible war between the Koreas, rampant economic failure in Europe spreading like volcanic ash over the world, and the renewal of terrorism in the U.S.
Rene A. Henry, Fellow PRSA (5/07):
Joe, Thank you for bringing this up again. Everyone reading it should send a copy to the president at their alma mater. The presidents run the NCAA now and are in charge of rules and costs, not the coaches or the athletic directors.
Presidents are begging for money and increasing tuition and fees for students. The only cuts are those that impact students. The benefactors and philanthropists that give to athletics, will give to the college for scholarships if money is not needed in athletics. They want the tax writeoffs.
I've asked a number of college presidents why a college football team needs 119 players compared to the NFL's 53. Most ignore my request for an interview or a response. If scholarships were cut 5 per year for 5 years, look at the savings not only in tuition, but insurance, team travel, uniforms, equipment and other expenses. It would not hurt the college game, TV rights would continue to rise and gate receipts would remain the same. It's econ 101 ... if revenues are the same or slightly more and expenses less, profit increases.
I've asked a number of college coaches being paid multimillions how much they give back to their colleges and again, no response. However, Joe Paterno, who is one coach who makes less than his president at Penn State. Paterno, who is the winningest active college football coach, is paid $512,664 and has given back more than $5 million to PSU.
Unfortunately, until the public gets outraged, your words are falling on deaf ears in academia. Hopefully some who read your words will ask why?
[email protected] (5/07):
Joe and Rene are correct. But I think Wes has hit the jackpot with his answer. This situation is not new and will only get worse as TV rights keep increasing for winning teams. Back in the days when I was a "cub" reporter, I asked the athletic director of a nationally-ranked "basketball university" how he could justify asking for more free athletic scholarships when students had difficulty paying their tuition. He got out of his chair, walked toward me and screamed, "Get of of my office." And he was supposed to be Mr Nice.
Joe Honick (5/11):
Arthur and Wes....if you feel wes is correft, then universities and colleges should simply hire the athletes and let them do their thing. As a former college boxer(sans scholarship and when they still had such things)I witnessed the onslaught of wholesale athletic scholarships and how a lot of students who could not kick,run, dunk or pass often had to drop out. I did not say it was not ever thus or would soon change, but I do fervdently believe it is time to irritate some of the folks.
Wes Pedersen (5/11):
It is what it is, Joe. Even dressed in your Don Quixote suit, and tilting mightily against the evil academic/sports windmills, you can't expect it to change.
Joe Honick (5/12):
For Wes, the best reason evil wins is when good people do nothing....to accept something that is wrong is wrong in itself...even if it involves tilting at windmills. Remember: a lot of the nasty political stuff you always put down occurred because so many threw up their hands saying: "That's just the way it is." I am not from that herd.
Wes Pedersen (5/13):
Joe, Joe, Joe. I'll throw rocks when the next university or college is caught actively violating school policy or civil law. But right now I prefer to focus on matters that, as I have said, are of far greater consequence for the nation and the world. You'll have to joust with those wicked windmills without me.
Joe Honick, GMA International Ltd (5/13):
Ah, my good friend, Wes, you know I have my tries at matters of national importance, one of which of course education at all levels. If you worry about such things, then comment on the story about all the money going into private PR firms to sell the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
George H. (5/11):
An interesting (and valid) article. I didn't expect to see the topic on a PR news site, but when I think about it, it makes sense. High-profile sports are great PR for colleges and put some on the map that don't deserve to be there for academic reasons.
Mr. Honick is right to question the madness here. I attended the University of Nebraska, one of the schools likely on the wrong side of this debate. The football players had the special books, study groups (and I suspect) grading system while the rest of us had the pay our way and actually study and attend class. This was the early 1990s so we're not talking too long ago.
Title IX has changed things somewhat, but more reform is certainly called for.
Media advisor (5/14):
Mr. Honick: Your essay was sparked by a report in the Seattle Times. Did you consider that you might have had greater impact by submitting your essay to that paper as an op-ed piece or a letter? You could still do it.
Joe Honick, GMA International Ltd (5/14):
My appreciation to Media Advisor for the advice which will be carried out. The article itsels was written quickly with this publication in mind. So thanks much for your thought.
Addendum to Media Advisor: I did as you suggested and submitted the piece to the Seattle Times whose editor responded: "We do not publish material that appeared in other publications." You almost might think the Seattle Times is the WSJ which does in fact often print stuff from other places when appropriate. Anyhow thanks for the idea. Identity: Joe Honick, GMA International Ltd.
Wes Pedersen (5/14):
Joe, here's a cause that warrants the Honick lance: cheating by students and lax review of student admission reqirements and peformance. A current case highlights the ease by which chicanery can slip past college administrators and professors. A 23-year-old male has exposed, just as he neared completion of his studies, for conning his way into Harvard and get thousands of dollars for support. He claimed perfection, and they bought it for years. Now consider that this occurred at the university most us consider the tops in the country and perhaps in the world. Should that fact alone not trigger an invesigation of the legitimacy of other students there and, indeed, around the country? Kids in every state and being turned down because their credentials are questioned; at Harvard we have a case of someone easing in at the expense of a truly qualified individual. The situation smells to high heaven. This is a case of "one bad apple" ...or so it will be claimed. But is it? How far back must the school's records be examined to see, if that is possible, how common cheating has been at Harvard? Back, even, to days when Barack Obama and Elena Kagan were dazzling everyone there with their brillance? Back to George W. Bush's day? |