New Stadium Talk Is A Diversion For Pitiful 2007 Record

DallasGreen · December 9, 2007

If you actually take the time to read RV's comments we are just using the money already funded by the Goldfields' to do what we said we would do with it when it was given--fund an architectural study. If we still think most of $52 million has to be raised from private donations when we just posted a 2-10 season losing by double digits to two of the worst teams in the country and ranking as the worst defense in the nation, the funding might as well be from the sale of oceanfront property in Arizona--It won't happen. Funding of say $20 million with another $5 million from the state for classrooms ,etc. al la UT's north end zone project with the remainder from $30 million of stadium bonds, retired over 10 to 15 years by a $50/head per semester stadium fee surcharge plus extra revenue from sale of luxury suites and naming rights, and it COULD be done. Probability of all that falling together with university red tape is small unless the business minds such as Dan Smith of the BOR can prevail over university politics. Those in academics that refuse to believe that we can be recognized as a first rate university in the state of Texas w/o first class athletic facilities and programs are as full of crap as a Christmas Goose.

Green to the Bone · December 10, 2007

If you actually take the time to read RV's comments we are just using the money already funded by the Goldfields' to do what we said we would do with it when it was given--fund an architectural study. If we still think most of $52 million has to be raised from private donations when we just posted a 2-10 season losing by double digits to two of the worst teams in the country and ranking as the worst defense in the nation, the funding might as well be from the sale of oceanfront property in Arizona--It won't happen. Funding of say $20 million with another $5 million from the state for classrooms ,etc. al la UT's north end zone project with the remainder from $30 million of stadium bonds, retired over 10 to 15 years by a $50/head per semester stadium fee surcharge plus extra revenue from sale of luxury suites and naming rights, and it COULD be done. Probability of all that falling together with university red tape is small unless the business minds such as Dan Smith of the BOR can prevail over university politics. Those in academics that refuse to believe that we can be recognized as a first rate university in the state of Texas w/o first class athletic facilities and programs are as full of crap as a Christmas Goose.

The Goldfields' money was for a feasibility study, which is not the subject of the recent RFQ. So I think your starting premise is wrong.

Your point about academics and athletics is debatable as well. UT-D is widely regarded as a highly competitive university but has virtually no athletics. Among privates, Rice is a nationally respected university while having an athletic program that is essentially an afterthought. OU may be attractive to new freshmen and donors because of its athletics, but it enjoys no academic distinction.

I'm for a new stadium. But I'm a bigger fan of facts and logic.

AJR2010OX · December 10, 2007

The Goldfields' money was for a feasibility study, which is not the subject of the recent RFQ. So I think your starting premise is wrong.
Your point about academics and athletics is debatable as well. UT-D is widely regarded as a highly competitive university but has virtually no athletics. Among privates, Rice is a nationally respected university while having an athletic program that is essentially an afterthought. OU may be attractive to new freshmen and donors because of its athletics, but it enjoys no academic distinction.
I'm for a new stadium. But I'm a bigger fan of facts and logic.

ou does have the most national merit scholars in the nation because of their competitive scholarship offer. they also built a $20 million journalism building in 04 I believe, which is beautiful. Rice does have their baseball team, which won a national title in 2003 I think and which also consistently goes to the College World Series.

Cr1028 · December 10, 2007

Your point about academics and athletics is debatable as well. UT-D is widely regarded as a highly competitive university but has virtually no athletics. Among privates, Rice is a nationally respected university while having an athletic program that is essentially an afterthought. OU may be attractive to new freshmen and donors because of its athletics, but it enjoys no academic distinction.
I'm for a new stadium. But I'm a bigger fan of facts and logic.

There have been studies on this sort of thing. The better the athletic programs are(especially football and men's basketball), the more inclined better quality students are to enroll in your institution. It isn't speculation, look at Boise State's enrollment figures post-Fiesta Bowl. As much as people want to debate it, the athletic programs are the national face of your universtiy. Take away UT's football and men's basketball program for 5 years and watch their enrollment plummet. I'm interested to see how admission application trends changed at SMU post-glory days. If your program is on the news for being successful, your future employer may hear the university name and it shows him that the university puts out a quality product. Besides, if for no other reason, it could help keep us from being call Northern Texas.

Coffee and TV · December 10, 2007

Some day geological activity will give us Arizona oceanfront property, and then what metaphor will you people use?

SilverEagle · December 10, 2007

Some day geological activity will give us Arizona oceanfront property, and then what metaphor will you people use?

I would use "I've got some lake front property in Loving county Texas to sell you".

Green to the Bone · December 10, 2007

There have been studies on this sort of thing. The better the athletic programs are(especially football and men's basketball), the more inclined better quality students are to enroll in your institution. It isn't speculation, look at Boise State's enrollment figures post-Fiesta Bowl. As much as people want to debate it, the athletic programs are the national face of your universtiy. Take away UT's football and men's basketball program for 5 years and watch their enrollment plummet. I'm interested to see how admission application trends changed at SMU post-glory days. If your program is on the news for being successful, your future employer may hear the university name and it shows him that the university puts out a quality product. Besides, if for no other reason, it could help keep us from being call Northern Texas.

First, go back and read the original post in this thread to which I responded, which said a. the stadium RFQ is just a diversionary repackaging of the Goldfields' donation and b. it is not possible to have a good academic reputation without having a good athletic reputation.

Point a is factually incorrect. End of that discussion.

Point b is just silly. Are athletics great for recruiting? Sure. No one could argue otherwise. But as noted, OU has lots of merit scholars because they hand out free school for them, not because of Bob Stoops. Have Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Cornell, Brown, Duke, Emory, Davidson, Northwestern, etc., failed to build good academic reputations because they have little or no athletic reputation? Do their graduates not get hired because they're not BCS contenders (or in some cases don't even play football)? Has SMU's miserable athletic reputation kept many Dallas-based law firms from hiring SMU law grads? Please. Athletics are terrific advertising, but let's keep things in perspective.

Edited December 10, 2007 by Green to the Bone

AJR2010OX · December 10, 2007

First, go back and read the original post in this thread to which I responded, which said a. the stadium RFQ is just a diversionary repackaging of the Goldfields' donation and b. it is not possible to have a good academic reputation without having a good athletic reputation.
Point a is factually incorrect. End of that discussion.
Point b is just silly. Are athletics great for recruiting? Sure. No one could argue otherwise. But as noted, OU has lots of merit scholars because they hand out free school for them, not because of Bob Stoops. Have Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Cornell, Brown, Duke, Emory, Davidson, Northwestern, etc., failed to build good academic reputations because they have little or no athletic reputation? Do their graduates not get hired because they're not BCS contenders (or in some cases don't even play football)? Has SMU's miserable athletic reputation kept many Dallas-based law firms from hiring SMU law grads? Please. Athletics are terrific advertising, but let's keep things in perspective.

Also, you could take away UTs fball/bball program, but that doesnt mean enrollment would drop. Many students in Texas would kill for the chance to go to a school in the state capitol, one of the top business schools in the nation, a growing business area in austin, one of the only us state department accredited Middle East studies programs, etc. You could take away USCs football program, and youd still have a top private school, located in the heart of LA, with one of the best film schools and international relations departments. The environment around the college is also a huge part of why students apply, and once Denton improves and becomes appealing to students (not gonna lie Denton sucks, UNT is awesome) enrollment will grow. I didnt come to UNT for the fball/bball program. I came for academics. Respect in academics brings kids to a school.

UNTLifer · December 10, 2007

If you actually take the time to read RV's comments we are just using the money already funded by the Goldfields' to do what we said we would do with it when it was given--fund an architectural study.

I read RV's comments and liked how he ended Vito's article on the stadium activity:

"We are not ready to cut dirt tomorrow," Villarreal said, "but we are moving quickly."

Cr1028 · December 10, 2007

I guess this is because BSU is becoming one of the Harvard's of the world:

Boise State Enrollment Reaches 19,540 Setting State Record Again; 3.5 Percent Increase is School's Largest in 4 Years
Further evidence of Boise State’s growing stature as one of the top public institutions of higher education in the Northwest is reflected in both the quantity and quality of the fall 2007 enrollment figures released by the university this week.
For the 10th time in the last 11 years, Boise State has set an all-time record for Idaho higher education institutions with an enrollment of 19,540 — an overall increase of 3.5 percent from last year’s head count of 18,876. The impressive increase of 644 students this fall marks not only the first time an Idaho school has surpassed the 19,000 mark, but also Boise State’s largest enrollment gain in four years during more than a decade of managed growth.
Equally important, says Boise State President Bob Kustra, is the fact the university is attracting not only more students, but also better students — a trend that is borne out in the profile of the incoming freshman class. Kustra notes that while the freshman class of 2,280 is a record, it is also one of the most academically talented groups to enter Boise State as indicated by:
• The addition of 12 National Merit finalists (an increase of 300 percent over last year) who received a renewable full tuition scholarship and an annual $2,500 stipend.
• An inaugural class of 28 Presidential Civic Leadership Scholars — recipients of a new scholarship award ranging from $1,500 to full tuition and fees renewable for four years offered to high-achieving Idaho residents who have experience in and a commitment to civic leadership.
• The recognition of 33 Boise State Capital Scholars — recipients of a $1,000 renewable scholarship acknowledging Idaho’s outstanding high school juniors who were in the top 10 percent of their class and scored within the top 10 percent of a national standardized test. The 33 recipients represent an 83 percent increase in Capital Scholars from the previous year.
• A composite ACT score that surpassed the previous year’s entering freshman class and exceeded the national and Idaho average scores.
• The students’ average high school GPA of 3.30, an increase from last year’s number.

Cr1028 · December 10, 2007

Also, here is the abstract from an article in the Dec. 2006 issue of Social Science Quarterly:

This article examines the extent to which the public connects athletic success with academic quality, whether these connections are stronger during a year in which a state university wins a national championship, the type of respondents most likely to make such connections, and whether these connections make a difference in terms of public evaluations and support for higher education. Embedded within the 2004 survey instrument, we also consider whether respondents primed with specific question wording identifying the national championship are more likely to make the connection than respondents given more generic language referring to success in college athletics. Data for the study are based on two statewide, randomly selected samples of Louisiana voting-age residents, with the first survey conducted in February 2004 in the wake of LSU's BCS National Championship and the second survey conducted in January 2005 in the wake of a 9-3 season. We find that a substantial proportion of the population believes that athletic success and academic quality are connected, that less-educated respondents are more likely to make such connections, and that these connections affect evaluations of colleges and universities. Athletic success may or may not directly affect academic quality, but the public largely believes such a link exists and those beliefs have important implications for higher education.

UNTLifer · December 10, 2007

If you actually take the time to read RV's comments we are just using the money already funded by the Goldfields' to do what we said we would do with it when it was given--fund an architectural study. If we still think most of $52 million has to be raised from private donations when we just posted a 2-10 season losing by double digits to two of the worst teams in the country and ranking as the worst defense in the nation, the funding might as well be from the sale of oceanfront property in Arizona--It won't happen. Funding of say $20 million with another $5 million from the state for classrooms ,etc. al la UT's north end zone project with the remainder from $30 million of stadium bonds, retired over 10 to 15 years by a $50/head per semester stadium fee surcharge plus extra revenue from sale of luxury suites and naming rights, and it COULD be done. Probability of all that falling together with university red tape is small unless the business minds such as Dan Smith of the BOR can prevail over university politics. Those in academics that refuse to believe that we can be recognized as a first rate university in the state of Texas w/o first class athletic facilities and programs are as full of crap as a Christmas Goose.

Love your optimism. You must be a joy to have around the house this time of year.