Earlier this week we had an editorial about the USC athletics department’s recent "contribution" of $15 million to the university. An excerpt:
A ‘gift’ that isn’t
a gift, and shouldn’t
be seen as such
PERHAPS YOU shouldn’t look a gift chicken in the beak, but there was something more than a little off-putting about all the self-congratulation and awe that accompanied the USC athletics department’s recent “contribution” of $15 million to the university to help pay for … academics.
This clearly is a large amount of money that has the potential to do a great deal of good at a school that is struggling under state budget cuts and the larger economic crisis. Just as clearly, such a gift is extraordinary and such a gesture, in the words of one USC trustee, “historic and symbolic.”
But there shouldn’t be anything extraordinary — certainly not “historic” — about university money being used to further the core mission of the university. In fact, it should be expected — the sort of thing that deserves commentary only in its absence. As difficult a concept as this seems to be, money generated by the athletics department, or any other part of a university, belongs to the university….
a gift, and shouldn’t
be seen as such
PERHAPS YOU shouldn’t look a gift chicken in the beak, but there was something more than a little off-putting about all the self-congratulation and awe that accompanied the USC athletics department’s recent “contribution” of $15 million to the university to help pay for … academics.
This clearly is a large amount of money that has the potential to do a great deal of good at a school that is struggling under state budget cuts and the larger economic crisis. Just as clearly, such a gift is extraordinary and such a gesture, in the words of one USC trustee, “historic and symbolic.”
But there shouldn’t be anything extraordinary — certainly not “historic” — about university money being used to further the core mission of the university. In fact, it should be expected — the sort of thing that deserves commentary only in its absence. As difficult a concept as this seems to be, money generated by the athletics department, or any other part of a university, belongs to the university….
Any thoughts on that?
I bring it up because when we ran the piece, I had expected to hear a good bit of reaction both pro and con, and things have been fairly quiet. So I thought I'd bring it up here, to see what y'all thought about it.
Related Posts
Since you ask — I agree. I’ve spent my adult life in universities and the amount of money involved in college athletics never fails to amaze me. The usual justification is that it keeps university supporters enthusiastic, and their enthusiasm benefits academic departments as well, but I haven’t seen much evidence in support of that. Mostly it just distracts from the real business of the university, which is NOT kicking a ball around.
No one, and I mean no one, understands the finances of the university. I have researched it, just a little bit, and came away mad as hell. How our elected leaders allow this wasteful kingdom building in this poor, near third world state, is beyond me.
We have a total collasped of the system of leadership in this state. From the outrageous mess in Columbia, to the tin horn government at the capital building…there is little or no honor to be found anywhere.
Real news you missed covering:
When USC announced they were reducing tuition or not increasing tuition as much, they increased lab fees and other fees to make up the difference. Spring tuition is up by exactly what it would have been with the original tuition increase proposed.
Beautiful thought about gift, ever time we cannot got gift it is surprise
Christena
More Movies More Fun & Entertainment