Wall Street Journal

[AU9377 4,966]

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

http://www.al.com/sp...ml#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.

Anytime an entire article is littered with words like apparrent, potential, possible, should, and too many ifs to count, you can count on the foundation to be nothing but sinking sand.

[AU9377 4,966]

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

If they wrote a piece about the majors of college athletes at SEC schools and wanted to imply that all schools were steering their athletes to less challenging majors, please have at it. They instead have chosen a dog that simply doesn't hunt. They have attempted to imply that this major is a major designed for athletes. That is nonsense. I have a BS in Public Administration. I also have a law degree from a top tier law school. There is no way in hell that the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts is lying about his decision to keep the undergraduate major. One reason not discussed is that Auburn offers a graduate Masters in Public Administration as well. Most schools like Auburn offer the major. UGA, for example, has approx 1,000 students in their undergraduate major currently. There isn't much that I detest more than someone using innuendo to disparage someone else with the specific intent to do so. The WSJ, for all practical purposes, assumes the athletes involved do not have the academic potential or aptitude to choose their own path. They clearly want these students to be treated differently than every other student at the University. That is insulting.

[juscAUse 1]

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.

White black or purple, these guys get a full ride to a major university. What they do or do not do with this great opportunity is not my problem.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

There's a lot of problem with the athetic dept offering to fund an academic program upon which a disproportionate number of athletes rely for their eligibility. A lot of problem. The WSJ reported that happened.

From the article. In addition to meeting with the school’s provost to urge him to spare public administration, the documents show, top athletic officials also offered to use athletic department funds, if necessary, to help pay its professors and support staff. Gary Waters, Auburn’s senior associate athletic director for academic services, wrote in an email in January 2013 that athletics had made “similar investments in academic programs during the last few years,” although in those cases, he added, “it has not been publicized.”

On race: The most recent numbers I could find are 70 overall graduation rate in football, 53 for black players. Missing is the percentage of black players on scholarship, which I suspect would tell us there's a wide discrepancy. If that's not a problem for you, there's a problem WITH you. It's not about what the players do alone; it's about how the university recruits and retains them.

[Tiger 8,827]

The former NCAA compliance guy saying there might be violations is going to hurt us in recruiting IMO. True or not the damage has been done from the report.

[TigerOne 1,147]

The former NCAA compliance guy saying there might be violations is going to hurt us in recruiting IMO. True or not the damage has been done from the report.

no damage, students can pick whatever major they want. At Auburn they have the opportunity to get an excellent education.

At the junior college across the state they don't release the athlete majors do they? Wonder why

[WarEagle84 0]

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.

NO!!! This would have far more serious implications for Auburn than anything alleged or implied in the WSJ article. The vote to discontinue the PA major was unanimous at the first level. It is not hard to imagine one or more of the faculty members who had their vote overturned getting butthurt enough to contact a reporter. Let it die a peaceful death. It will go away unless someone comes up with new evidence.

[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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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.

NO!!! This would have far more serious implications for Auburn than anything alleged or implied in the WSJ article. The vote to discontinue the PA major was unanimous at the first level. It is not hard to imagine one or more of the faculty members who had their vote overturned getting butthurt enough to contact a reporter. Let it die a peaceful death. It will go away unless someone comes up with new evidence.

THIS ^^^

[quietfan 233]

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

If they wrote a piece about the majors of college athletes at SEC schools ...

Personally, I'd like to see a story on why only 1 of 14 SEC schools feels a need to conceal information (based on "privacy laws") that the others have no problems with releasing?

http://bleacherrepor...-players/page/6

These are the top five majors in the SEC, which had information available from each school except for Alabama.

...

*According to Alabama director of football communications Josh Maxson, the program could not release major info for players due to privacy laws.

[AURex 2,008]

I don't think it's just going to go away that easily. This involves the NCAA, who will want t know if Auburn is funneling athletes into a degree program that is designed to maintain their eligibility. This involves not just football players, but also basketball, baseball, softball, etc.

And it will draw the attention of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), which accredits the university as an academic institution. You'll remember, they put Auburn in probation for trustee meddling in university academics. Now you've got the Athletic Department meddling in academic affairs.

Offering money to keep a department that the university faculty had *unanimously* voted to disband was a really stupid thing for the Athletic Department (i.e., JAY JACOBS) to do. Really stupid. Unbelievably stupid.

[AU64 10,122]

I don't think it's just going to go away that easily. This involves the NCAA, who will want t know if Auburn is funneling athletes into a degree program that is designed to maintain their eligibility. This involves not just football players, but also basketball, baseball, softball, etc.

And it will draw the attention of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), which accredits the university as an academic institution. You'll remember, they put Auburn in probation for trustee meddling in university academics. Now you've got the Athletic Department meddling in academic affairs.

Offering money to keep a department that the university faculty had *unanimously* voted to disband was a really stupid thing for the Athletic Department (i.e., JAY JACOBS) to do. Really stupid. Unbelievably stupid.

Totally disagree with all of your predictions and conclusions....JMO....like yours is just an opinion....

[GreenEyedGirl 6]

http://www.oanow.com/news/auburnuniversity/article_f8c07ca6-4cf4-11e5-97b2-8fc4ec06e2f5.html

UPDATED: Auburn dean says athletic department didn't influence decision to keep public administration major

Posted: Thursday, August 27, 2015 3:00 pm | Updated: 7:06 pm, Thu Aug 27, 2015.

Tom Green | AU Sports Writer

Opelika-Auburn News

tgreen@oanow.com

Follow on Twitter

The dean of Auburn’s College of Liberal Arts said three factors contributed to his request to save the school’s public administration program — and none of them had to do with Auburn’s athletic department.

Shortly after being named the college’s dean in 2013, Joseph Aistrup approached the university’s provost, Timothy Boosinger, about keeping the public administration major intact amidst concern that the university would nix the program, which included several Auburn student-athletes.

“Shortly after I arrived on campus, I had a meeting with the new chair of political science and the program director of public administration,” Aistrup told the Opelika-Auburn News in an email Thursday. “At that meeting, I asked if hiring a lecturer in political science would help to alleviate the burden. They indicated it would, and thus supported continuing the program.”

Aistrup arrived at Auburn as the college’s new dean in Sept. 2013, just months after Auburn’s curriculum review committee voted, 10-1, to place the public administration program on “inactive status,” according to a report by the Wall Street Journal. The report, which was published Wednesday night, indicated that the public administration program was a “small, unpopular” major that “added very little to the school’s academic mission.”

According to the report, however, the decision to eliminate the program was overruled by top administrators at the behest of Auburn’s athletic department. The report, which cites internal documents and emails obtained from the university, claims that athletic department officials lobbied Boosinger to keep the major afloat and even offered to use athletic department funds to help pay the program’s faculty and staff.

The offer to fund the program, which is within the College of Liberal Arts, was declined by the university and the major was eventually kept intact. Auburn confirmed to the WSJ on Wednesday that the school’s athletic department had offered to subsidize the program, but the offer was refused.

When reached for comment, an Auburn athletics spokesman referred the Opelika-Auburn News to contact the university.

“Auburn’s academic community makes all academic program and curriculum decisions,” a university spokesman told the Opelika-Auburn News in a statement Wednesday night. “Auburn is fully committed to the integrity of its academic programs.”

Auburn also told the WSJ that the decision to keep the program going was made after Aistrup asked Boosinger to keep it open.

“First, I have a public administration background and believe strongly in the academic viability of this undergraduate major,” Aistrup said. “Second, the academic program review report indicated that political science wanted to eliminate this degree because the department did not have the faculty resources to continue to support the major. As the new Dean, I was willing to provide the necessary resources to continue this major.”

That’s when Aistrup met with the chair of political science, Dr. Steven P. Brown, and the program director of public administration, Dr. Kathleen Hale, about what could be done to “alleviate the burden” that came with the lack of faculty resources within the program.

According to the report, 51 percent of the 111 students majoring in public administration during the fall 2013 semester were student-athletes, while the major accounted for less than 1 percent of the undergraduate population at Auburn.

“Public administration, with over 100 pre-professional majors, had more majors than five other departments in the college,” Aistrup said. “I felt it was important to keep a major open that was serving this many students.”

Eighteen members of Auburn’s 2013 football team were public administration majors, according to the team’s media guide from that season. Twenty-seven players from the 2014 team majored in public administration, while 16 football players are enrolled in the program on the 2015 team, according to Auburn media guides.

"Each individual player, they’ve picked their major, they pick what they want to graduate and what they want to do in life," Auburn head coach Gus Malzahn said Thursday.

The report indicated that Auburn athletic director Jay Jacobs and senior associate athletic director Gary Waters met with Boosinger in April 2013 to discuss the elimination of the major after an internal memo within the department in December 2012 indicated that graduation success rate numbers for student-athletes would decline if the public administration program was eliminated.

Dr. Michael Stern, the head of the economics department and a former member of the Auburn faculty senate, told the WSJ that “it’s a different kind of process” when academic and athletic interests intersect at Auburn.

“The university and the board of trustees, elements of it, are obsessed with football and that makes its way down and you find that even academic officers are scared when there are athletic things that arise because athletics has power on the board and so forth,” Stern told the Opelika-Auburn News on Thursday. “They’d like to keep their jobs and so forth, so yeah, I mean, if you can imagine, Jay Jacobs shows up in your office it’s going to be intimidating for most parts.”

Aistrup said he did not have contact with Auburn’s athletic department upon his arrival that September, and the first time he met with members of the athletic department was in November of that year.

“I did not have any contact with any member of the athletic department until November of 2013, when a development officer and I met with Jay Jacobs to discuss the progress on the band building project,” Aistrup said. “We did not discuss public administration.”

Aistrup added that the academic review of the public administration program, which occurred in March 2012 before Aistrup was hired, made no mention of student-athletes enrolled in the program. The review only said that the political science department within the College of Liberal Arts was “doing too much with too few resources.”

He also said that the review made no hint of any sort of academic fraud within the program. According to Aistrup, Boosinger’s office performed an analysis of grades awarded to all of the students enrolled in the public administration program and found “no evidence that student-athletes were given any special considerations.

“Students in this and all programs earned the grades they received based on their performance on tests and assignments,” Aistrup said. “Period.”

Tom is the Auburn University Sports Writer for the Opelika-Auburn News.

[au701948 1,001]

I agree...and also wish the person that wrote this particular article had the good sense to see almost "all" universities of any size have a curriculum similar to Public Administration. I guess maybe I should check to see if my diploma from 44 years ago just disappeared into thin air because mine was in Business Administration. However, without it being specifically "Public Administration", I did spend the last 15 years of my career in Public Administration and I am sure some of my course work back in the dark ages may have been common to "Public Administration".

[AURex 2,008]

Totally disagree with all of your predictions and conclusions....JMO....like yours is just an opinion....

My only conclusion and prediction is that this will not just float away like smoke in a hurricane. There will be questions asked. There will be scrutiny from outside the university.

I did not say it would amount to anything beyond that. If you think nobody from NCAA or SACS will bother to even look into it, well, yep, we will just have to disagree about that. I think they will look.

Even if NCAA and SACS walk away, it is yet another black mark on Auburn's national reputation that will linger in people's memories. I don't like it. I don;t like that our beloved Auburn is so often put in such a bad light.

[AU-24 3,100]

What is wrong or easy about a Public Admin degree? I know we are talking undergrad here but still. It's been said a MPA is to govt management (Fed, state, Local) what a MBA is to business management. Many an attorney, politician, political staffers, started with a Public Adman degree. Many Military Leaders, Civil Servants, United Nations Staffers, US Embassy employees and high level staffers have MPA degrees. Historically, the master’s degree in business came out of the field of economics, and public administration out of political science, says Stuart I. Bretschneider, chairman of the public administration department atSyracuse University. The master’s of public administration, he says, is “a management degree where people get an awful lot of exposure to context,” whether poverty in Africa or war in Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.c...box-t.html?_r=0

There are many Al State and US Federal members of congress with a MPA, or undergrad in Public Admin. Many military high ranking officers to include General Officers with a Public Admin degree, I don't get it?

Plus there is always:

Bill O’Reilly

The United Nations is Being Led by an MPA - Ban Ki-Moon

Hill Harper Doesn’t Just Play a Smart Guy on TV (MPA)

[juscAUse 1]

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.

I bit and responded. I wish I had said that.

[keesler 5,924]

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

If they wrote a piece about the majors of college athletes at SEC schools ...

Personally, I'd like to see a story on why only 1 of 14 SEC schools feels a need to conceal information (based on "privacy laws") that the others have no problems with releasing?

http://bleacherrepor...-players/page/6

These are the top five majors in the SEC, which had information available from each school except for Alabama.

...

*According to Alabama director of football communications Josh Maxson, the program could not release major info for players due to privacy laws.

Someone inside the Auburn University academic program is ready, willing, and able to feed confidential information about AU academics and athletics to an outside source resulting in the most current black eye on AU. AU faculty and staff participated in interviews and helped provide the WSJ with sensitive information that should have never left the boarders of AU.

IMHO, there is a big divide between academics and athletics at Auburn....why can't academics join in and enojy being part of the Family like the rest of us?

[eagle76 1]

When will we ever learn. This is not the first time that AU has stepped on its own "Richard" regarding academics/athletics. We just can't seem to keep our "Richard" from under our feet. While I don't condone an admin/prof from ratting out the athletic program, I can see why with all the publicity and $ involved with athletics. University prof pay and teacher pay in general sucks. I just wish that there was more harmony between the two.

[wde21 344]

That was my first thought when I read the article. Some of the faculty definitely are anti athletic. I am really surprised that they would go to the WSJ with this info. Apparently a lot more hatred of Athletics than loyalty to Auburn. It is rather disappointing that we have faculty with that mindset.

[au701948 1,001]

There are always going to be some academics that have no tolerance/appreciation for athletics. And with that being the case, it will always be (and must be) the Athletic leadership's responsibility NOT to do anything irresponsible from which disgruntled academics/other parties can create a crusade or story. That directive should already be in place and cast in stone given our past history. That is one reason that makes me hopeful that this is in fact a non-story. OK.so the Athletic Department made their wishes known. However, the decision to finally keep the PA curriculum was made by the Dean and faculty after he, the Dean, provided additional staff with him having not discussed anything with the Athletic Dept. The Dean's decision was based on providing faculty/staff support, with no consideration given to the student population. End of story. Anyone/organization, whether it be journalists, SACS, NCAA, must see that 1) nothing was created for benefit of athletes-PA already existed 2) and Athletic Department made their wishes known and offered help. I agree that offering help was not wise, BUT the Academic Administration said, "No Thanks"! And that was exactly their responsibility. Everything was kept on the Academic side "Period" per the Dean.

[AUfan_UAgrad 230]

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.

No, what it sounds like is one or two people in the PA department (or maybe another department) have been gathering information over time and just sent it to several newspapers, and the WSJ bit.

Well if that is the case, no one at AU has learned a lesson from the past and it appears AU once again tries to destroy from within.

I just find it strange that our own faculty and staff would agree to be interviewed for what is obviously a hit piece on their employer.

Did Jay Jacobs really get in Provost Boosigers ear about the continuation of a major that the academic department had previously voted down? And did Jacobs go so far as to back his position with money to subsidize the program which resulted in the continuation of the program? Do we really have rats in AU that would leak out information to the public like this?

As hard as it is to believe, the answer is more then likely yes we do have people that would leak information to the public and or are willing to try and bring down the athletic department or mainly certain people in other departments. All universities do. I saw it first hand at Bama.

[AU-24 3,100]

With the information below; what is wrong with a Public Admin degree? I just don't get why the WSJ implies it is a easy jock degree?

These are the top five majors in the SEC, which had information available from each school except for Alabama. Business is also king in the SEC—it would be the biggest cluster on its own—with sports and recreation management majors coming in second place.

• Business (107) and related majors: 199
  
• Sport/recreation management or administration: 80
  
• Communication (60) and journalism: 69
  
• Kinesiology and exercise sciences: 53
  
• General studies: 55
  

Texas A&M's leading major was one completely unique to the Aggies, agricultural leadership and development.

Sport administration dominated LSU with 30 majors on the football team, making for one of the biggest majors in a given Power Five school. Auburn had 35 different types of majors listed on its roster, making the Tigers second behind Virginia Tech for the most among the power programs.

And here are those top majors for the SEC schools:

• Alabama: Business
  
• Arkansas: Recreation and sport management
  
• Auburn: Business
  
• Florida: African-American studies
  
• Georgia: Business
  
• Kentucky: Undergraduate studies
  
• LSU: Sport administration
  
• Mississippi State: Human science
  
• Missouri: Business
  
• Ole Miss: General studies
  
• South Carolina: Sports and entertainment management
  
• Tennessee: Recreation and sport management
  
• Texas A&M: Agricultural leadership and development
  
• Vanderbilt: Communication studies
  

[AU9377 4,966]

I don't think it's just going to go away that easily. This involves the NCAA, who will want t know if Auburn is funneling athletes into a degree program that is designed to maintain their eligibility. This involves not just football players, but also basketball, baseball, softball, etc.

And it will draw the attention of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), which accredits the university as an academic institution. You'll remember, they put Auburn in probation for trustee meddling in university academics. Now you've got the Athletic Department meddling in academic affairs.

Offering money to keep a department that the university faculty had *unanimously* voted to disband was a really stupid thing for the Athletic Department (i.e., JAY JACOBS) to do. Really stupid. Unbelievably stupid.

This is already going away due to there being nothing to the nonsense. This is not an NCAA issue and compliance would laugh at the assertion. The writers of a couple articles went to great lengths to imply wrongdoing. but have shown none. Get over it. My problem with the academic side is that we are all here to work together. I am a professor and an attorney. I know the process. When some people on the academic side allow their insecurity to take over their mouths, they get pissy. They are at home by 4, sometimes by 2:30 watching General Hospital and still complain of their work load. Really people.

[AU64 10,122]

That was my first thought when I read the article. Some of the faculty definitely are anti athletic. I am really surprised that they would go to the WSJ with this info. Apparently a lot more hatred of Athletics than loyalty to Auburn. It is rather disappointing that we have faculty with that mindset.

Keep in mind the faculty are employees....I bet the vast majority of them are not AU grads....in fact most universities make it a point to not hire their own graduates in order to bring diversity of opinion.

I expect most faculty members feel loyalty to their own careers first...then maybe to their departments but I doubt many of them feel anywhere near the same loyalty to the university that alums do.

Why is anyone surprised that a big school like AU would have whistle blowers who would dump on the school the first time something did not go their way?

[AU9377 4,966]

When will we ever learn. This is not the first time that AU has stepped on its own "Richard" regarding academics/athletics. We just can't seem to keep our "Richard" from under our feet. While I don't condone an admin/prof from ratting out the athletic program, I can see why with all the publicity and $ involved with athletics. University prof pay and teacher pay in general sucks. I just wish that there was more harmony between the two.

THe pay does not suck... I know first hand. When you can make over $100,000 per year and teach 2 classes, sometimes 3, spending the rest of your time with writing and research(cough cough), life is not bad. The reality is that there are a few bad apples that enjoy the recognition brought about by having big time athletics, but see themselves as superior to everyone around them, including those in the Athletic Department. Anything the Athletic Department does, no matter how benevolent and non threatening it is, is seen by these few as a heavy handed demand. The resist everything for the sake of butting heads. The University can't hunt them down and remedy the problem due to the additional bad PR that would come with that kind of action. There is really close to no journalistic integrity at all now with the internet and faceless authors of online publications. They don't require proof of wrongdoing and will print anything they can develop and piece together, regardless of its merit. Those that deliberately attempt to bite the hand that feeds them won;t see immediate consequences, but I can assure you that those high and mighty individuals will not retire from Auburn University.