Wall Street Journal

[AU64 10,122]

Thanks for the view from the inside 9377. Kind of confirms my own thoughts and observations. Faculty have their own priorities and for many (most?) there is no automatic linking of their own happiness or success with the success of the school's athletic program.....and considering the big salaries, the national media attention, etc there is plenty of reason for envy. And as noted....there is really nothing to be done about it.

[WarEagle84 0]

al.com beat writers summarize what is known about issues raised by WSJ article

Here is a summary for those who don't want to watch the video [bracketed comments are my own interjections]:

According to the former Poli Sci department head, the committee only voted to suspend PA major for a few years, a decision that needed to be reviewed by the Dean. There was no dean at the time. [The WSJ article implies that the review of the decision by the Dean was only done in response to pressure from Athletics.] In Sept, the new dean [who himself has a PA degree] was told by dept head that they didn't have enough faculty/staff resources to keep the major going, and he agreed to provide those resources.

The former head of the department took issue with how his quote was used. He didn't mean it in the way they made it sound. He was responding to new information that surprised him.

[from WSJ: ...Gerry Gryski, then the chairman of the political science department, ... In an interview this week, Gryski said he was unaware that the athletic department had offered money to help keep the major open. “I’m searching for a word here,” he said. “It’s unbelievable. It’s incomprehensible.”]

Academics believe they are clean, nothing irregular, no problems or dishonesty.

Big unanswered question is Why did AD offer to subsidize?

Could be NCAA issue, but very unclear with what is known. Definite accreditation issue if AD meddled in academics.

Story only implied impropriety by bringing up UNC, though none of the factors at UNC are alleged at Auburn.

According to internal documents within Poli Sci department, faculty were not happy with quality of writing by students in PA. They surveyed students, and were not happy with small number of responses nor caliber of the responses they did receive.

SACS is very slow moving body, not likely to have any resolution soon.

[eagle76 1]

9377 may (cough, cough) at the research and papers that profs do but most if not all are required by universities to get funding and grants. Many profs in engr and the sciences spend countless hours on research and guiding student projects/research. Compare the 100k salary of someone that is guiding young minds for our future vs the multi-millions paid for coaching young bodies to win games. Now that I've said all that, I will say that I am one of the biggest fans of our athletic department and contributor. I BELIEVE in BOTH. Like I said previously, I just wish that they could both get along or at least tolerate and understand the role/function of each and their value to the university.

[tgr4lfe 220]

.

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.

The good reason to report something would have been reporting it as it was, MSU booster tried to pay for Cam to MSU, but that was NOT how it got reported.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

First, we don't know how the WSJ got this story. Coulda come from faculty, but it's odd to make that an immediate assumption.

Second, the reason someone might report a thing like this is that they thought it was wrong. If I were in a university and the atheltic department threw money or influence to affect an internal academic decision, you can bet I'd be crawling up the food chain. Faculty might resent coaches' salaries, but what really bothers them is when athletics detracts from the university's mission. Most of the faculty I worked with in college and university settings really enjoyed helping athletes succeed. Which is hard, given they have another full-time job.

Third, y'all apparently don't know what faculty make. Full professors at Auburn average $114K. That's typically well over ten years into their careers, and it's a tough promotion to get. Tenured associate profs average $81K. That's a minimum of six years' service (some perhaps elsewhere), having passed a tenure review. I've taught places where that's hard and places where it's easy. But at that rank you're talking about a person with significant experience and documented accomplishment. Assistants (from PhD to tenure review) average $71K.

All that varies by field. Consider what, say, an aerospace engineer could pull in industry, and compare that to a historian. Moreover, the engineer might make a lot more money from grants (or might not). A good history prof could easily have gotten into a top law school and been making $150K at the same age they'd be making half that in academics. My girlfriend makes literally six times what I do, and we're basically professional equals who admire one another's careers. On the other hand, academics is a great career if you can land a tenure-track job: flexible hours, varied schedules, work one feels passionate about. I'm just saying your image of pampered professors is a bit far afield from a school like Auburn.

[Mikey 16,622]

First, we don't know how the WSJ got this story. Coulda come from faculty, but it's odd to make that an immediate assumption.

Not odd at all, considering disgruntled faculty's past history with contacting the press.

About your race statistics: They are meaningless unless you can post links to the numbers at other, similar schools showing that they have significantly better results in that area than does Auburn. What do those numbers look like at UGA, UAT, LSU and others?

[AU64 10,122]

First, we don't know how the WSJ got this story. Coulda come from faculty, but it's odd to make that an immediate assumption.

Not odd at all, considering disgruntled faculty's past history with contacting the press.

About your race statistics: They are meaningless unless you can post links to the numbers at other, similar schools showing that they have significantly better results in that area than does Auburn. What do those numbers look like at UGA, UAT, LSU and others?

Agree or not, but IMO a sizable percentage of minority athletes at AU and other SEC schools would never have the chance to step inside a college classroom if it were not for their athletic abilities. Many are barely academically qualified (compared to the student body as a whole) and if 40% (or whatever) of those manage to graduate, I think they and society are way ahead of the game. The more the better obviously, but setting up coursework to manipulate the numbers doesn't do much in the long run.

It would be nice if the rates were better but back in the day when I was at AU and it was not integrated, about half of the white freshmen who started school never graduated....most leaving their first year. Chemistry and English were notoriously used to weed out marginal students...or those who did not apply themselves.

JMO but the schools have a limited responsibility toward helping any student.....mostly I see their role as providing the opportunity..and the student taking advantage of it.

[juscAUse 1]

First, we don't know how the WSJ got this story. Coulda come from faculty, but it's odd to make that an immediate assumption.

Not odd at all, considering disgruntled faculty's past history with contacting the press.

About your race statistics: They are meaningless unless you can post links to the numbers at other, similar schools showing that they have significantly better results in that area than does Auburn. What do those numbers look like at UGA, UAT, LSU and others?

Agree or not, but IMO a sizable percentage of minority athletes at AU and other SEC schools would never have the chance to step inside a college classroom if it were not for their athletic abilities. Many are barely academically qualified (compared to the student body as a whole) and if 40% (or whatever) of those manage to graduate, I think they and society are way ahead of the game. The more the better obviously, but setting up coursework to manipulate the numbers doesn't do much in the long run.

It would be nice if the rates were better but back in the day when I was at AU and it was not integrated, about half of the white freshmen who started school never graduated....most leaving their first year. Chemistry and English were notoriously used to weed out marginal students...or those who did not apply themselves.

JMO but the schools have a limited responsibility toward helping any student.....mostly I see their role as providing the opportunity..and the student taking advantage of it.

Facts vs feelings.

[Mikey 16,622]

JMO but the schools have a limited responsibility toward helping any student.....mostly I see their role as providing the opportunity..and the student taking advantage of it.

That's how I see it too, but we aren't part of "The world owes me" generations. I have a friend that still teaches at AU. He says the entitlement attitudes of today's students are beyond belief. He also said that two of the hardest working, least "entitled" kids he's taught were Bo Jackson's and John Mengelt's daughters. Apparently millionaire former athletes can raise some proper young uns.

[logan adams 333]

Without orange and blue glasses on.. How detrimental could this be to our football program?

[Mikey 16,622]

Without orange and blue glasses on.. How detrimental could this be to our football program?

There is nothing that's a real problem. Period. NCAA, SACS and so forth have zero interest in this. Now, public perception and how much play this non-story gets in the media is another matter. There will be attempts to spread lies and blow this up into something real. How successful those behind this are depends on unknowable factors.

My best guess is we've all heard the last of it. A lot of people ended up with egg on their faces over the Cam Newton fiasco. Hopefully, they will be more cautious this time.

[augolf1716 21,207]

Haven't seen a word on it recently. Its dying quickly imo

[logan adams 333]

Thanks fellas!

[eagle76 1]

If it does show back up it will be the week of the uga game.

[RunInRed 16,430]

Letter from Provost to Faculty ...

[TigerOne 1,147]

only reason this story appeared... updyke academy

[DyeCampAlum 335]

Statement doesn't address whether Athletics tried to influence the decision, particularly by offering money. Also doesn't address academic quality of programs directly. I hope he's saying the academic program is tight, but it bothers me he doesn't speak to the first issue.

[PatBoCamRob 30]

only reason this story appeared... updyke academy

They are beating us handily with the lawyers and PR machine. I think AU is finally catching on that this is a battle waged on several fronts.

Alabama people really like to twist the written record. Tuscaloosa is steeped in mendacity.

It didn't get much worse than the Cam Saga. I watched major news outlets run what was essentially statements by Finebaum's crazies. Wondered how non-stories were elevated so high and untruths got the credence they were lent.

Uh, because Alabama has the law school. Because they are graduating the journalists. And it doesn't stop there. I guarantee a Bama fan is on Wikipedia right now editing an article about the 1907 Iron Bowl.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

Although the provost's statement doesn't address the behavior of the athletic dept, we do have enough information to believe Auburn has no big issues directly related to this story. The provost has defended the decision making process, the university has acknowledged the athletic dept's inappropriate overture, and the dean says a grade audit in the public admin dept raises no issues. All of that is good news.

Anyone who takes this story, though, and investigates the details of academics and football at Auburn can make us look bad. The data is out there. But it's likely not much different than lots of other schools. Many schools have wide racial disparities in academic outcomes. I hope we could draw closer to the others who don't.

According to this story, the national football graduation rates for black players runs 19% below white players. It's a complicated issue, and some schools are doing better than others. I wish our results were more like Georgia's and Penn State's.

Just the same, I hope somebody drew a sharp line in front of Jacobs. Just stuff you shouldn't even think about doing in his position.

[Mikey 16,622]

Other than public opinion, I see nothing wrong with the athletic dept. offering money to help fund a certain major. There was no problem when Pat Dye gave all the A-day income to the library.

[AU64 10,122]

Strikes me that a few people have JJ in their gun sights and will jump on board in support of anything that can be construed (even remotely) to put some negative light on him. JMO but it's time for them to find something else to carp about....this "scandal" is going no where.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

The problem happens when sports tries to shape academic policy for its own special benefit. 51% of the majors are athletes, which is a remarkably high percentage in a school Auburn's size.

Giving to the library is just giving. It's much appreciated. This is different, as it affects the curriculum. In a university, the faculty is supposed to run the curriculum under supervision of the administration and trustees.

An in-between case might be athletics funding a program in, say, sports management or sports medicine that could benefit the university in general and perhaps the athletic program. I'm sure Auburn athletics benefits ag programs and vice versa: the grass fields provide a wonderful lab. I imagine an openly advertized link like that would play very well.

[madkat7 233]

Other than public opinion, I see nothing wrong with the athletic dept. offering money to help fund a certain major. There was no problem when Pat Dye gave all the A-day income to the library.

We have been tried and convicted so many times in the court of public opinion over the last 20 years that any new issue that arises, no matter how trivial, receives an immediate negitave sentence. Every time that I read an article about Auburn, no matter the subject, the comments preceding the article are laiden with anti-Auburn rhetoric. A significant percentage does come from Bammers, but an equally significant percentage comes from the remainder of the country. "Auburn is dirty", though untrue, has become a given throughout the nation.

[juscAUse 1]

Then screw them all. AU against the world. I'll take those odds any day.

[Mikey 16,622]

Then screw them all. AU against the world. I'll take those odds any day.

I wasn't there, but some who were told me that when the team was put on probation around 1957 a banner was stretched across College St. at Toomer's Corner: "Auburn gives the world 24 hours to get out of town." That's pretty close to my normal mind-set.