… if you need a little pick-me-up about university football, complete with excited invocations of ‘shirtless boys,’ read this. Its title is It All Begins With Football, and ain’t it the truth. This one little essay will put all your angst right in the shade and get you pissing your pants all over again for the team.
June 13th, 2012 at 8:49AM
Fenster commented at Dr. Mead’s website at the time this was posted late last year. Those comments follow. And for the record, I was not blowing smoke at Mead . . . I read his blog almost every day and am a great admirer of his clearheaded (usually) view of the world. Not this time.
——————-
I am a big admirer and regular reader of this column. But this article has me worried that you might be blowing smoke more than I thought, since you clearly seem to be blowing it here. You make awfully grand statements, backed up by not a shred of evidence. It’s an oddly ideological statement from one I usually think of as hard-headed.
Of course it is true that historically athletics have formed an integral part of the special bond colleges make with students, alumni an donors. But that’s just a fact that needs to be put into context, and everything is relative. Is athletics in fact as key a bonding agent as you assume? Does it lead as directly to big donations and appropriations as you assert? “Athletics has been important” is a true statement, but is it true enough to float your grand conclusions? Hmmm . . . I doubt it. The fundraisers I’ve known recognize the appeal of athletics but whether their appeal causes enough dough to come across the transom to cover costs and produce a net benefit to the institution is another matter altogether.
And therein lies the problem. All well and good to make a generalized historical assertion that sports rivalries have had their upsides. But at the moment universities are faced with very specific financial problems related to athletics–in essence the cost base of a mini-NFL grafted onto an academic program. Most university CFOs will tell you that, while some big athletics programs make money, most are a sucker’s bet. So fundraising programs chase that big $2 million donation for a $10 million field house, finding themselves unable to say no to the gift and having to shovel the difference in out of tuition.
It just sounds to me like you are all misty eyed and romantic about a phenomenon that calls for your usual rigor.
June 13th, 2012 at 8:52AM
Now that I think of it, Fenster also wrote a somewhat longer rejoinder on his own blog, here:
http://fensterreturns.blogspot.com/2011/12/more-sports.html
June 13th, 2012 at 9:04AM
fenster: Thank you for that comment and for the link to your longer response. I think you’re right that Mead is simply getting all girly here. Cannot think straight on the subject. Love is a many splendor’d thing.