2008 Woodie Awards
Home > Opinion
Join forces for a better UO
Editorial
by Emerald Editorial Board |
Last week the University Senate passed a motion to ask the athletic department to share its profits with the academic side of the University. The motion is in no way binding, and with uncertainty surrounding both the plans to build a new arena and the economy in general, the outcome is far from a sure thing.
Nevertheless, given the social and civic purposes of a university, we support this sort of co-funding model. It is too easy for a university to become and remain a house divided between athletics and academics. Often, the stereotypical incompatibilities between 'jocks' and 'nerds' become more than just banter, especially when the differences become measured in budgets, salaries, and campus infrastructure.
The rivalry manifests itself in arguments over who deserves what because of the two sides' respective contributions to the University's reputation and prestige. The two sides also butt heads over funding, whether from tuition, the state, private donations, or, in a category where academics falls far behind athletics - ticket sales.
In this regard, when justifying who deserves what and why, we have to ask: Is the essence of a university, of this University, centered around its academic departments or around the Ducks? The answer should be both.
This institution is more than the sum of its parts. Without the athletic department and programs such as track and field, basketball, and football, the University would not have nearly the national and international recognition that it enjoys. Its outstanding contributions to research and education likely would be largely unknown outside Oregon's borders, and many people would probably think of it as the college from "Animal House."
Conversely, without a comfortable academic home in which to cohabitate, a nest built and maintained in a large part by the state's coffer, the Ducks could be a civic league or a franchise club of various sports, but hardly the sort of organization that would have games shown live on cable, or the reputation to become the seat for the U.S. Olympic Trials in track and field, or be able to move with the force of Nike's right arm.
Nevertheless, given the social and civic purposes of a university, we support this sort of co-funding model. It is too easy for a university to become and remain a house divided between athletics and academics. Often, the stereotypical incompatibilities between 'jocks' and 'nerds' become more than just banter, especially when the differences become measured in budgets, salaries, and campus infrastructure.
The rivalry manifests itself in arguments over who deserves what because of the two sides' respective contributions to the University's reputation and prestige. The two sides also butt heads over funding, whether from tuition, the state, private donations, or, in a category where academics falls far behind athletics - ticket sales.
In this regard, when justifying who deserves what and why, we have to ask: Is the essence of a university, of this University, centered around its academic departments or around the Ducks? The answer should be both.
This institution is more than the sum of its parts. Without the athletic department and programs such as track and field, basketball, and football, the University would not have nearly the national and international recognition that it enjoys. Its outstanding contributions to research and education likely would be largely unknown outside Oregon's borders, and many people would probably think of it as the college from "Animal House."
Conversely, without a comfortable academic home in which to cohabitate, a nest built and maintained in a large part by the state's coffer, the Ducks could be a civic league or a franchise club of various sports, but hardly the sort of organization that would have games shown live on cable, or the reputation to become the seat for the U.S. Olympic Trials in track and field, or be able to move with the force of Nike's right arm.
Be the first to comment on this story