Wall Street Journal

[AU64 10,122]

What do you do if your are a Junior or Senior and they cancel the degree? Why not ask Harvard cancel all degrees other than Economics and Engineering for Football? No athletic program has ever contacted an academic department? Academic departments never speak to Athletics? WTH!

They'd finish their degree - eliminating the program from the curriculum would have been for all future students. But the students already vested in the major would be able to finish their degree.

Apparently the atletic department felt that if the program was eliminated the graduation success numbers for AU's student-athletes would decline. Apparently the AD was very concerned that the major needed to remain active or they wouldn't have offered to subsidize the program.

Likely..and as Pike noted, it's not an exclusive for athletes.

Ever since I was at AU 50 years ago there has been an internal struggle about what the school should be....remembering that it was API for a long time...but gradually the liberal arts, business and education proponents have seemed to win the battle.

There are probably 10 time the degree options at AU now...compared to when I was there. About every time some field of study gets popular in the outside world, AU will put it in its program.

And from time to time the garden needs weeding. So now perhaps a case can probably be made that if about every college and university in the state has a PA degree option, AU might give that up and spend the money on something where we have a special interest and reputation.

Certainly there are fields of study that attract students with middle of the road academic capabilities and I guess the decision on what happens to PA and lots of other courses such criminal justice (which used to be quite popular) are still necessary for AU to be a well rounded state university.

Seems that I recall way back in the day when Bobby Dodd at Ga Tech was pushing the school to add some non-engineering courses to help him with recruiting....and I think he got something ....Industrial Management which to the techies sounded better than Business Administration. Time moves on but many things do not change much.

[RunInRed 16,427]

Most Common Academic Majors for 2015 Power 5 Conference Football Players

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MbtR6hLCECJIZxoEnvte0ThRs6LA8yCzZC1pTbnBSDI/edit#gid=1456872256

[AURex 2,006]

I went through the entire roster of AU football players, looking at their Major. There were 11 majoring in PA. Almost as many are in Interdisciplinary Studies, whatever that is. A group in Pre-Communication. And if course, a bunch in Physical Ed/Exercise Science.

But the degree program doesn't really matter. It's the idea of the Athletic Dept offering to support an academic program that a lot if athletes major in. It looks bad. It smells bad. And despite the good intentions, this is just case in which the Athletic Department acted without thinking through the consequences, and shot themselves (and the university) in the butt.

[AU64 10,122]

Most Common Academic Majors for 2015 Power 5 Conference Football Players

https://docs.google....#gid=1456872256

Looks like we need to shut down the Business School too....lots of athletes hanging out there ....looks bad....

[juscAUse 1]

My only point is that every negative post starts with "if this happened..." or "if it turns out.." or "it appears this might...."etc, etc. I am not even saying that this isn't a big deal. I'm just saying we don't know-yet. And until proven otherwise, I'll side with AU. The press does not deserve the benefit of the doubt on any issue involving AU based on their track record the last 10 years. If not longer.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

We don't know yet. All we know is that the athletic dept. offered money to influence the curriculum in an eligibility-friendly direction. That's a bad thing. Literally, the thought shouldn't even cross their minds.

I have no patience with the us against the media take. Somehow the WSJ learned about it. Then they reported it. If we're not doing it, it doesn't get reported. Pure and simple. The media had good reason to report on Cam, too.

I notice no one has responded to my observation about race at Auburn.

While I'm ranting, it's far from obvious that big-time sports benefits Auburn academics. Quite a few strong state universities do without big-time sports. UC San Diego is a fabulous school. The SUNY schools. Vermont does without football, and it's very good. Football hasn't helped Georgia State grow into a big-time university. Among private schools without big-time footbal are Georgetown, Emory, Washington University, Johns Hopkns, and NYU. I fully understand why many academics resent big-time football. In fact, I'm really a football fanatic against my own better judgment.

[AU Cav 0]

The Media Hit Piece has become as reliable a predictor of the start of football season as The Nip.

[AU64 10,122]

We don't know yet. All we know is that the athletic dept. offered money to influence the curriculum in an eligibility-friendly direction. That's a bad thing. Literally, the thought shouldn't even cross their minds.

I have no patience with the us against the media take. Somehow the WSJ learned about it. Then they reported it. If we're not doing it, it doesn't get reported. Pure and simple. The media had good reason to report on Cam, too.

I notice no one has responded to my observation about race at Auburn.

While I'm ranting, it's far from obvious that big-time sports benefits Auburn academics. Quite a few strong state universities do without big-time sports. UC San Diego is a fabulous school. The SUNY schools. Vermont does without football, and it's very good. Football hasn't helped Georgia State grow into a big-time university. Among private schools without big-time footbal are Georgetown, Emory, Washington University, Johns Hopkns, and NYU. I fully understand why many academics resent big-time football. In fact, I'm really a football fanatic against my own better judgment.

Observations deemed unworthy of a response....it happens sometimes.

[keesler 5,924]

I went through the entire roster of AU football players, looking at their Major. There were 11 majoring in PA. Almost as many are in Interdisciplinary Studies, whatever that is. A group in Pre-Communication. And if course, a bunch in Physical Ed/Exercise Science.

But the degree program doesn't really matter. It's the idea of the Athletic Dept offering to support an academic program that a lot if athletes major in. It looks bad. It smells bad. And despite the good intentions, this is just case in which the Athletic Department acted without thinking through the consequences, and shot themselves (and the university) in the butt.

I don't think the issue is that jocks were majoring in the program, that happens at every school....The issue is the fact that the department heads voted to get rid of the program and the AD stepped in to keep it active and backed their position by offering to subsidize the course resulting in academics having to bow down to athletics. Obviously someone at AU got pissed, gathered a bunch of inter-office memos/emails, and decided to send it to the WSJ who took the bait and wrote the article.

[telling tiger 156]

http://www.al.com/auburnfootball/index.ssf/2015/08/auburn_dean_athletics_did_not.html#incart_m-rpt-2

[AU9377 4,960]

The fact that this is even a story in the WSJ smells of a smear job. OF COURSE the athletic administration is going to speak up if a large number of student athletes are majoring in a curriculum that's about to be terminated. This story never states that public administration is a lemon degree, nor does it even address the difficulty of the curriculum. Instead, it's full of innuendo and weak/faulty references to the academic scandal at North Carolina. How do you even make the comparison to an athletic department standing up to an administration and being a voice for their athletes that will be affected in their degree pursuit with a scandal of utter impropriety and not come off smelling of an agenda?

Think about it - "Hey Coach, they're doing away with my degree! Me and half the team are going to have to choose another major. Can you do something?" This should not be a story at all. What's embarrassing is that this kind of "story" meant to hint and insinuate impropriety finds a voice in the wall street journal. Journalism is dead.

I seriously doubt that the Wall Street Journal has some sort of plot to smear Auburn. I really don't get the persecution complex some folks on this board seem to have. I'll admit there are certain journalists who are obviously biased against Auburn, but most of them are doing it to get reads from rival fan bases. The next week, they turn around and do it to another school and we flock to the articles. Again though, I don't think that's what's going on here.

Also, even if the major had been shut down, I'm 99% sure they would've let any current majors finish their degrees. That's how these things work; it's not like all of those players would've been hung out to dry with a bunch of useless credits. The issue here is that athletics wants to keep up a specific major that a large amount of athletes tend to major in. Are we really going to say it's coincidence that all of these athletes are just interested in public administration? Does no one here remember what was going on with sociology under Tuberville when we nearly lost our accreditation? Let's take off the orange and blue glasses and hold our school accountable for its mistakes. Not because we want to hurt it, but because we want it to be as great as possible.

Academic integrity ought to always come first.

This guy gets it. I'm really not sure how so many of you can quickly dismiss this as a "nonstory". Athletics should not be influencing academics. ATHLETICS.SHOULD.NOT.BE.INFLUENCING.ACADEMICS. The fact that so many academic review boards voted to do away with PA and the football team basically stepped in and said "Not gonna happen" is troubling. Auburn University is about educating people first. This is troubling whether y'all are willing to admit it or not.

This is a non story. There is absolutely no evidence that remotely suggests wrongdoing. NONE. You ASSume an implication and that does not make this a worthy story.

[WarDlowe 39]

I hold a PA degree from AU. Was it as hard to obtain as an engineering degree? Obviously not, but it was no walk in the park either. I am currently working in the public sector while working on a Masters in a different field, and almost everyone I knew personally in the PA program with me has gone on to become a lawyer, director of a non-profit, or work successfully somewhere in the public sector.

The problem I have with this article is that it cheapens the degree I worked to obtain. The way I remember it, the PA degree only varied from a Poli-Sci degree by about three classes, so I'm not sure where the "non-degree" innuendo comes from. When I graduated it was toward the end of the Tuberville era. I had a few football players in each of my classes. I can't tell you what they did or how they performed, but I can tell you they were in class and participated the same amount I did. I could give a flying flip where funding comes from for academics at Auburn, and would almost say the Athletic Department SHOULD be funneling money back into the school to make it more successful. After all, Auburn exists to be an academic institution.

[AU9377 4,960]

We don't know yet. All we know is that the athletic dept. offered money to influence the curriculum in an eligibility-friendly direction. That's a bad thing. Literally, the thought shouldn't even cross their minds.

I have no patience with the us against the media take. Somehow the WSJ learned about it. Then they reported it. If we're not doing it, it doesn't get reported. Pure and simple. The media had good reason to report on Cam, too.

I notice no one has responded to my observation about race at Auburn.

While I'm ranting, it's far from obvious that big-time sports benefits Auburn academics. Quite a few strong state universities do without big-time sports. UC San Diego is a fabulous school. The SUNY schools. Vermont does without football, and it's very good. Football hasn't helped Georgia State grow into a big-time university. Among private schools without big-time footbal are Georgetown, Emory, Washington University, Johns Hopkns, and NYU. I fully understand why many academics resent big-time football. In fact, I'm really a football fanatic against my own better judgment.

I have no patience with your acceptance of an implied wrongdoing that the author of that article doesn't have the confidence to even accuse someone of directly. First of all, there is nothing wrong with the Athletic Department voicing concerns about a proposal to eliminate a major that many student athletes have chose. That is not academically dishonest and is not an ethical issue at all in any manner. The implication that the author is conveying is that this situation is in some way like the UNC academic fraud case. There could not be a wider divide between the two. The new Dean of the College of Liberal Arts said the following as reported in a follow up WSJ piece today:

Unlike other major football schools, Auburn doesn’t offer programs in sports administration or sports management, which are popular with players, but the major in public administration is comparable, an athletic department spokeswoman said this week. Joseph Aistrup, the Auburn dean with oversight of the program, is a political scientist who has done research in public administration. He called himself a “PA guy” in an interview this week. “I didn’t want to see a PA program in the undergrad level put asunder,” he said.

Even after several faculty committees voted to suspend the major, Aistrup said he felt it was important for a pre-professional program in the College of Liberal Arts to remain an option. “It’s something that we need,” he said. “It’s a program that students want.”

You can call the man a liar if you want.

[AU9377 4,960]

This article is littered with comments/statements and detailed and dated emails regarding this subject. How long has the WSJ been investigating this at AU? They interviewed AU faculty members...I mean Micheal Stern (the chairman of AU's economics dept said, "athletics is so powerful at Auburn that it operates like a "second university"..... That statement alone is a hit on Auburn University IMO.

Then the WSJ went on to state that they had documents from 2012 and memos from the Provost along with the results of voting to remove the major.

All this sounds like the WSJ has been on this case for a long time, and they've been very intimate with the AU employees while gathering memo's, emails, documents, dates, etc.

So what? Does Michael Stern even realize that by NCAA rules the Athletic Department is required to function like it is a separate University. Obviously not. I have a wall full of degrees as well, but I also have colleagues with some of those same degrees that simply know nothing about anything other than their focused field of study.

[AU9377 4,960]

I'm a professor at another institution. PhD, Vandy. Played small college football and sat on the faculty academics committee at a mid-major. One of my former college teammates, Virgil Starks, worked in academic support for Auburn athletes.

All that to say, I love Auburn, and this smells bad.

On the OK side, I would expect sports to direct students toward majors they can complete. It's hard to play football and be pre-med, with all the labs and so forth. Frankly, some students lack the academic background to do heavy statistics and the like.

On the bad side, Auburn athletics has no business intervening in the university's internal academic policies unless there's some injustice happening to players. Throwing money to influence academic policy is just out of bounds. That's what smells. GIven our history in sociology, there's also a need to look into the academic rigor of these courses. If Auburn winds up in trouble, that's where it'll happen.

On the threatening side, during the Chizik era, Auburn had a football graduation rate of 100% for white players and 44% for black players. Don't know where that stands now. I'm sure someone will try to defend that. Such a person should not be allowed to go outside without a chaperone. At any rate, someone is gonna look into whether race factors into this issue, and it could reflect very badly on the university if the results haven't changed. Auburn has to address the intersection of race, academics, and athletics.

I suppose you think professors and/or some other influence doesn't want black athletes at Auburn to be successful and graduate? Get over yourself. You cheap assertion like that is why race relations cannot be honestly discusssed. You seek blame over a solution.

[AU9377 4,960]

We don't know yet. All we know is that the athletic dept. offered money to influence the curriculum in an eligibility-friendly direction. That's a bad thing. Literally, the thought shouldn't even cross their minds.

I have no patience with the us against the media take. Somehow the WSJ learned about it. Then they reported it. If we're not doing it, it doesn't get reported. Pure and simple. The media had good reason to report on Cam, too.

I notice no one has responded to my observation about race at Auburn.

While I'm ranting, it's far from obvious that big-time sports benefits Auburn academics. Quite a few strong state universities do without big-time sports. UC San Diego is a fabulous school. The SUNY schools. Vermont does without football, and it's very good. Football hasn't helped Georgia State grow into a big-time university. Among private schools without big-time footbal are Georgetown, Emory, Washington University, Johns Hopkns, and NYU. I fully understand why many academics resent big-time football. In fact, I'm really a football fanatic against my own better judgment.

Your first sentence is what is wrong with this discussion. We DO NOT KNOW that money was offered to influence the curriculum in an eligibility friendly direction as you suggest. That sentence disgusts me. The article did NOT state that. The article stated that the Athletic Department offered to assist in funding the program if funding was an issue on the academic side. There is nothing wrong with that. When the Athletic Department gave millions to help build the library, was that wrong of them? Some academics, but certainly not all, resent big time athletics. However, man understand that big time athletics add to and certainly do not take from the University as a whole.

[AU9377 4,960]

The story is a bit troubling. The new dean of CLA says he didn't know there was a single student athlete in public administration; I find that very hard to believe. I am a born and bred Auburn fan and graduate and the last thing I want to do is trash my school, but this is embarrassing.

How? Why would the Dean know that John Doe was a student athlete? Why would that matter? Don't buy into the implied fear,

[AU9377 4,960]

My only point is that every negative post starts with "if this happened..." or "if it turns out.." or "it appears this might...."etc, etc. I am not even saying that this isn't a big deal. I'm just saying we don't know-yet. And until proven otherwise, I'll side with AU. The press does not deserve the benefit of the doubt on any issue involving AU based on their track record the last 10 years. If not longer.

I will say this: THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[keesler 5,924]

My only point is that every negative post starts with "if this happened..." or "if it turns out.." or "it appears this might...."etc, etc. I am not even saying that this isn't a big deal. I'm just saying we don't know-yet. And until proven otherwise, I'll side with AU. The press does not deserve the benefit of the doubt on any issue involving AU based on their track record the last 10 years. If not longer.

I will say this: THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Damn AU9377 - I wish you would infiltrate the Auburn program and get to the rat that's been leaking inter-office memo's, emails and the details of the meetings in the Administration. Someone needs to find out how and why an AU faculty/staff member would voluntarily feed this kind of information to the Wall Street Journal. The insider needs to be exposed and dealt with immediately.

[auburnatl1 4,955]

My only point is that every negative post starts with "if this happened..." or "if it turns out.." or "it appears this might...."etc, etc. I am not even saying that this isn't a big deal. I'm just saying we don't know-yet. And until proven otherwise, I'll side with AU. The press does not deserve the benefit of the doubt on any issue involving AU based on their track record the last 10 years. If not longer.

I will say this: THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hope so but its all over sports talk in Atlanta. And it's not nice.

[SCBusPilot 72]

Smear campaign in full swing - digging up NCAA compliance 'experts' at Ohio University now:

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/08/ncaa_compliance_expert_weighs.html#incart_river

An NCAA compliance expert believes there "could be a potential NCAA issue" at Auburn after the athletic department reportedly lobbied to keep an athlete-friendly undergraduate program from being eliminated.

Dr. David Ridpath, associate professor of sports administration at Ohio University and NCAA compliance expert, weighed in on the Auburn athletic department's apparent involvement in keeping the university's public administration major on the curriculum after the faculty voted to disband it.

"The biggest concern Auburn has is they need to explain why they kept (public administration)," Ridpath told AL.com on Thursday. "Are they keeping it for the sole purpose of clustering athletes there and keeping their eligibility there? That could be a potential NCAA issue."

According to The Wall Street Journal, athletic officials at Auburn lobbied school provost Timothy Boosinger to keep the public administration major on the curriculum after the faculty voted to disband it. The athletic department offered to subsidize the program, but the offer was turned down and the major was kept, Auburn confirmed to the Journal.

The "real problem," Ridpath says, lies with accreditation and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), which has not responded to an inquiry from AL.com. In December 2003, SACS placed Auburn on probation for what it felt was excessive trustee influence in day-to-day university matters, particularly athletics, following the "Jetgate" scandal.

"Part of accreditation is whether they have institutional control over their athletics program, and whether the athletics program improperly influences academics," Ridpath said. "The answer could come in on that, if there's some direct evidence. It's definitely still an accreditation issue because they brought it back after a faculty vote to disband it."

According to Auburn records, 16 current members of the Auburn football team, four members of the men's basketball team and three members of both the baseball and softball teams are majoring in or have completed bachelor's degrees in public administration. Thirty-one Auburn football players were public administration majors in 2013, and 26 in 2014, records show.

Auburn football's academic progress rate (APR) reached a program-low score of 935 in the 2008-09 school year, but rose in each of the next five years while more players declared themselves public administration majors.

If a team's APR score drops below the NCAA benchmark (currently a 930 four-year average) the sanctions could include loss of scholarships, reductions in practice time and potential postseason bans.

"If athletes are being funneled into that major for the sole purpose of keeping them eligible, then they are essentially manipulating academia," Ridpath said. "I don't know if that many athletes really want to major in public administration. I think Auburn has some questions to answer and they should do that. They should get out in front of this."

Joseph Aistrup, the dean at the College of Liberal Arts, told AL.com athletics did not influence his decision to recommend the program stay alive upon his arrival as the new head of the college in September 2013. Aistrup said an examination of grades within the major showed no concern for academic dishonesty, adding that the influx of athletes in the curriculum was also not a red flag.

AL.com's James Crepea and Brandon Marcello contributed to this report.

[AU9377 4,960]

My only point is that every negative post starts with "if this happened..." or "if it turns out.." or "it appears this might...."etc, etc. I am not even saying that this isn't a big deal. I'm just saying we don't know-yet. And until proven otherwise, I'll side with AU. The press does not deserve the benefit of the doubt on any issue involving AU based on their track record the last 10 years. If not longer.

I will say this: THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Damn AU9377 - I wish you would infiltrate the Auburn program and get to the rat that's been leaking inter-office memo's, emails and the details of the meetings in the Administration. Someone needs to find out how and why an AU faculty/staff member would voluntarily feed this kind of information to the Wall Street Journal. The insider needs to be exposed and dealt with immediately.

You can accept every bit of this as absolute truth and it is still not an issue. There is nothing that states that anyone from the AD;s office pressured or placed undue influence on those making the decision. The AD is allowed to voice concerns. This remains a free country. Today the dean has stated without reservation that the decision was his and his alone and that he never spoke with the AD about the program. Over and done.

[AU64 10,122]

My only point is that every negative post starts with "if this happened..." or "if it turns out.." or "it appears this might...."etc, etc. I am not even saying that this isn't a big deal. I'm just saying we don't know-yet. And until proven otherwise, I'll side with AU. The press does not deserve the benefit of the doubt on any issue involving AU based on their track record the last 10 years. If not longer.

I will say this: THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hope so but its all over sports talk in Atlanta. And it's not nice.

This will be a big deal where ever dawgs, bammers and gamecockc hang out. It's SEC country and the SEC schools will go to extreme lengths to smear opponents.....they report other schools for imaginary violations, poison trees, etc. etc.

Meanwhile, something that happened back in 2013 is news today? why? and the guy who made the ultimate decision poo-poos the story and yet it's a big deal in Atlanta? Why is anyone surprised? And why are AU people so eager to find fault with the school?

No doubt, AU-Cav has it right...football must be right around the corner.

[auburnatl1 4,955]

I am exhausted by what seems the yearly auburn's a dirty program innuendo story.

However, the timing of when we're perpetually "zinged" is never in the who-cares of February. Always in prime time. Does make you wonder.

[Randman5000 4,229]

its not on espn, college football talk, or cbssports. that's something though, AU9377.