2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumUnder President Sanders, public colleges won't have fancy dormitories and giant football stadiums
or high paid football coaches. Is that enough to make tuition free and will Americans be receptive to such a dramatic shift? Has he mentioned any specifics on what the salary cap for professors and coaches would be?
http://jobs.aol.com/videos/advice/sanders-cites-a-dormitories-and-a-stadiums-as-hurting-afford/519352715/
LWolf
(46,179 posts)would be about learning, not about feeding the sports industry?
Horrors.
apples and oranges
(1,451 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)I don't know that they should.
While I understand the national, the human love of competition, and I think sports is a great outlet for our aggressive and competitive natures, I don't know if education and sports should be linked.
In my ideal world, and yes, I'm a defiant and stubborn idealist, people value education for the sake of learning. I guess if I thought that ideal were achieved, it wouldn't bother me to blend the two. Then again, that same defiant idealist tells me that we should celebrate human physical and artistic abilities, along with intellect, because we value them intrinsically as well, not because we're going to make a profit off of them.
So maybe my pov really goes back to the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivators, and my preference for the intrinsic.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)As far as fancy dorms....stupid! But that train as left the station. These students want their balconies, mini suites, quartz countertops, and organic food in the cafeteria. I can't imagine thes going backwards. But who knows.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)and advertising?
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Most colleges and universities lose money on their sports programs. Big money.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Most sports would be gone if not for football.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)The other sports exist mainly to satisfy legal requirements that colleges spend equal money on men's and women's sports. This costs a lot of money where there is a multi-million dollar football program. Of course, most schools lose money on football, too, because they can't get on television. Semi-professional college sports are hugely expensive, and only a few schools can make money. The rest are left to their unrealistic dreams and wasted dollars.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)We'll see what Bernie can do.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)What are you talking about?
jonno99
(2,620 posts)Last edited Wed Jan 20, 2016, 12:45 PM - Edit history (1)
apples and oranges
(1,451 posts)jonno99
(2,620 posts)coyote
(1,561 posts)Generally speaking, you just pay for a dorm or a place to live plus living expenses such as food. Education is free. There is no collegiate sports program. If there is, then it would be tiny compared to US sports program. Normally you play sports in a local clubs, but there is no large organized sports in university.
jonno99
(2,620 posts)emulatorloo
(44,121 posts)Donor money and ticket sales.
Fans spend money in the town and buy shirts etc from the University.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)I don't.
apples and oranges
(1,451 posts)Not Bernie.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)While sport programs at many colleges need direction, they provide an amazing service and are a huge part of the educational process. Just one more area where Sanders reluctance to talk to experts makes him sound just like that; someone not willing to talk to experts.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Explain how please.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Some of the bigger land grants actually EARN money from their sports programs, but the issue he's trying to point out is that many state colleges spend more on "ritzing up" and flushing good money after bad than on education.
I'm sure there is some sort of happy medium for this.
Look, most of the schools in the SEC, for example, are public colleges (notable exception: Vanderbilt) and many of them earn money from their sports programs and those programs then donate back to the school. I doubt he - or anyone else - would cut programs that earn money.
Besides, Sanders WAS a student athlete. He understands the need for extracurricular activities.
apples and oranges
(1,451 posts)I don't think that will go over well.
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)50,000 people in desperate need of exercise.
blue neen
(12,319 posts)I agree with Bernie that the focus should be on education, but it's too late at many schools.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)(also I'm not sure what salary capping professors would have to do with anything?)
For some schools, trying to run these massive programs that compete with schools like Ohio State is a serious drain on resources leading to higher tuition and fees. Some schools are going to have to tone it down or find alternative methods of funding for this stuff.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)I don't recall any of them ever being "fancy". Crowded and messy? Yes. Fancy? Nope.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Some schools provide their athletes with luxury dorms, gourmet food, cars, money, etc.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Oh Lord.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)It's about as hilarious as the football coach making twice as much money as the university president.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Most colleges' student dorms can't be characterized as fancy. Heck, even the dorms in my boarding school days weren't really fancy.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Michigan, Florida, Florida St, Ohio, etc. all the majors can run the entire university from football revenue. Seems those high priced coaches pay for themselves. Oregon profits were higher than some NFL teams.
That doesn't seem to be the issue. Maybe it's all those people sitting in offices making too much money...
Vattel
(9,289 posts)by those programs. For good info on this, see http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/sports/wp/2015/11/23/running-up-the-bills/
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...use that spending to get federal matching funds, or spend federal matching funds on that.
RKP5637
(67,108 posts)apples and oranges
(1,451 posts)Breaking up the banks, putting insurers out of business, building a new healthcare system from scratch, restructuring public colleges (including ending college sports), and God knows what else.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)But government is big, and it'd be nice to have lots of positive initiatives coming through rather than a reliance on a few big headline items. They might not all make it, but I love that he has a lot of good ideas.
RKP5637
(67,108 posts)It's a tall order IMO. Plus, he has to get a lot of people to agree with him, and congress is filled with obstructionists, as well as states at many levels.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)do not pay for themselves, let alone produce revenue for any other aspect of the universities.
Once you add up the cost of the salaries of the coaches, the trainers, the cost of equipment, the cost of the scholarships, the cost of the travel to away games, it's a fuck of a lot of money.
The other myth is that alums donate because of winning football programs. Wanna guess which schools have the highest percentage of graduates who donate? Hint: Not a single school in the top ten is a football powerhouse.
Princeton University (NJ) 62.9%
Thomas Aquinas College (CA) 58.3%
Williams College (MA) 56.9%
Florida College 54.4%
Bowdoin College (ME) 54.2%
Middlebury College (VT) 53%
Davidson College (NC) 52.9%
Wellesley College (MA) 51.4%
Carleton College (MN) 50.6%
Amherst College (MA) 49.2%
Beacool
(30,247 posts)I think Sanders is referring to state universities.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)But the claim is constantly made about how generously alums of schools with winning football programs donate. The truth is, while donations occur, it's not on the scale that the Universities would like us to believe.
My younger son went to a school in Division I, and during the four years he was there he and his classmates became angrier and angrier about how the stadium was rebuilt, reducing the number of seats, and the student seating got pushed into a really crappy section. It did not endear the ordinary students to the school's athletic program.
Anyway, the claim is constantly made about how football makes money for the schools, but that is probably more myth than anything. If the schools were honest they'd pay their athletes, but they don't. And isn't it more than a little bit sad that schools are better known for their winning football or basketball teams than for the Nobel Prize winners they might have produced?
GeorgeGist
(25,320 posts)because parents will refuse to allow their children to play it.
apples and oranges
(1,451 posts)quickesst
(6,280 posts)... We won't have to worry about that. WOO PIG!! RAZORBACKS!!!