PonyFans.com

It's about time those dunderheads keep their damn mouths shut when it comes to the athletic department and the role it can play on our campus.

Their smugness is an outrage. And they would be wise to read this from Kevin Sherrington's column on 10/17.

College athletics are "essentially a commercial enterprise," if you believe Gary Roberts, dean of the Indiana law school, who told the Knight Commission this week, "these programs are not really in the education business. They're in the entertainment business, and the values that permeate that culture are very different from the values that permeate the education culture."

Faculty can't protest like they used to, Roberts said, because "when it comes time to decide whether or not we're going to play a football game on a Thursday night, and there's going to be national exposure and a couple of million dollars in the bank, the faculty aren't going to be able to stop that train. And I think at the end of the day, their sense is that if they tried to get in front of the train, they'd just get run over anyway."

It's time for the faculty to know it's place and to stay the hell out of the way when it comes to picking the new football coach and how we can change the system to get players into school.

George S. Patton wrote: It's time for the faculty to know it's place and to stay the hell out of the way when it comes to picking the new football coach and how we can change the system to get players into school.

Preach, brother!

To wit, the faculty would say, "Fine. As soon as athletics stops being a gigantic hole in SMU's budget, we will shut up."

This is why college athletics gets a bad name. Accusing the faculty of the being the problem is wrong headed and a waste of time. I hate playing the victim and we should stop now.

It is correct that college sports is entertainment and big business. More so for the BCS schools, since the budget$, alumni base and students are so large. That is not the same as changing the mission of the university from academics to entertainment. It is simply a fact of life.

Administratioin runs the school and they hire the faculty to delivery education and help the students graduate. To dismiss their objectives as interfering with sports is backwards.

Having said that, I am among the strongest supporters of the role of athletics in the development of men and women while serving the needs of student-athletes in both reveneue and non-revenue sports.

Let's not create enemies where there aren't many. If there are, so what. The faculty's mission is primary, but our is complimentary, if not essential to the development of the university's students.

Let's worry about getting the FB on the right foot with the right leadership. That will keep us busy enough without wasting time looking for the enemy within.

To wit you reply. As soon as the acadamians let the athletic department function as it should, the athletic department can start making money and better the University.

[quote="George S. Patton"]
[b]College athletics are "essentially a commercial enterprise," if you believe Gary Roberts, dean of the Indiana law school, [quote]

And the day is coming when players are paid. We were just ahead of our time.....

Another reason we should sue the NCAA.

Why don't you sue the NCAA, mr. p?

I don't believe he was implying that he'd sue them personally.

Every good lawsuit has a plaintiff.

I'd think the schools themselves would go further as plaintiffs, but I'm just an unfrozen caveman lawyer.

What's their cause of action for complaining about the prohibition of paying players set forth in the rules of the private organization they joined voluntarily?

Dunno. But the schools might just have a better case than Mr. P.

Trust me, they don't.

Cruel and unusual punishment???

What about my suit that I want to file for not being paid while I was a player. Was there not some kind of discrimination taking place? I was not alone. I would think a class action case could be made but I do not know who I should sue. Any of you lawyers want to take my case on a contingency?