Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

(10-11-2013 03:06 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

I counter with the fact that JMU is an excellent buy compared to peers and other schools in VA.

No one forces a student to come to JMU. If it bothers them, they can go elsewhere. However, if you look at Virginia Public Schools, almost all have high student fees that go toward athletics. I think you are arguing against something that is widespread, not only at JMU.

(10-11-2013 03:03 PM)POTUS#4 Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 02:43 PM)mistrhanky Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 02:16 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Thank you for asking. Let me list the reasons why I am opposed to a move:

4. Could the money be spent better elsewhere? Surveys are showing that soccer is moving up in terms of interest and that football is more of a sport for "old timers" like us. Combine that with the impending concussion liability, the future of college football doesn't look bright.

Actually, studies really are not showing that. Football is stronger than ever, earns more revenue than ever, and is the pinnacle of U.S. sport. Soccer is growing fast, but is light years away from ever catching football, basketball, baseball. Perhaps it might pass hockey(heartbreaking) or NA$CAR one day, but not the top three. There are people who ignore the concussion issue as a big problem long term, but it definitely is. In a society where we seem to be more and more concerned about saving people from themselves regardless of individual decision or responsiblity, it is a reality football will have to deal with. In 7 years, there probably won't even be kickoffs. But, concussions are a whole other topic.

...

You're talking about two different things, I suppose. Soccer has certainly surpassed football as far as participation by kids and adults - by a mile. But Football is far more popular as a spectator sport (in the U.S) - by a mile. There's no doubt where the money is. Even if JMU had a top ranked soccer team, fan interest would only be a fraction of what it is for football.

And Phlegmish, although I also have a problem with some of the issues you raise, such as admitting marginally qualified students, shifting emphasis and resources from football to soccer won't eliminate many of those problems but merely shift them to a different sport.

Good point. I agree, youth participation is a much different matter. In fact, I know of only two kids, all the way up through high school, that play football. I know several in soccer, bunches in swimming, and tons more in hockey and field hockey(because I am in tune to those with my kids).

(10-11-2013 03:09 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 03:06 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

I counter with the fact that JMU is an excellent buy compared to peers and other schools in VA.

No one forces a student to come to JMU. If it bothers them, they can go elsewhere. However, if you like at Virginia Public Schools, almost all have high student fees that go toward athletics. I think you are arguing against something that is widespread, not only at JMU.

I've heard many reasons from alums who went to other VA universities as to why they chose that school over JMU. Not once have I heard, "the fees were too high".

(10-11-2013 03:09 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  [quote='Phlegmish' pid='9841772' dateline='1381522002']
Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

I counter with the fact that JMU is an excellent buy compared to peers and other schools in VA.

This is a good point. Often recognized as a great value school. However, the "they can go elsewhere" argument is somewhat misleading, as JMU offers many great majors not offered at some of our VA peer institutions...

(10-11-2013 03:13 PM)Potomac Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 03:09 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 03:06 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

I counter with the fact that JMU is an excellent buy compared to peers and other schools in VA.

No one forces a student to come to JMU. If it bothers them, they can go elsewhere. However, if you like at Virginia Public Schools, almost all have high student fees that go toward athletics. I think you are arguing against something that is widespread, not only at JMU.

I've heard many reasons from alums who went to other VA universities as to why they chose that school over JMU. Not once have I heard, "the fees were too high".

You have never heard someone say the cost of JMU was too high? It is not a cheap ticket. The fees are part of that.

(10-11-2013 03:06 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

100% of the students benefit, directly or indirectly, from JMU's athletic program.

Additionally, as an education major, you don't hear me wanting back the $'s of my tuition that went towards funding academic programs that I wasn't involved in.

I would also argue that the engineering major at VA Tech that has never been to a game, and doesn't care for athletics, still is benefiting from the national attention the football program at VA Tech brings to the university.

(10-11-2013 03:06 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

100% have the option to go to another school if they don't approve of the total bill.

my tuition probably paid for buildings, programs, enhancements, etc that I never used, cared for, stepped foot in, etc, etc

universities are not a la carte.

Good arguments all around. As a loyal Duke, I will (grudgingly) support whichever direction the University decides.

^ that's the spirit! and we will continue to pay you during the summer :-) just teasing...

I'm editing to add this -> I kinda sound like a dick below...but i'm wrapping up a long week and have a bit of a "thing" for good writing and good arguing. please don't take my comments as uncivil...but seeing as you are in a position to influence young minds I hope you come to our side - FBS can be good for the school and for academics if planned out the right way.

(10-11-2013 02:16 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Thank you for asking. Let me list the reasons why I am opposed to a move:

1. Whether the fees go from 81-72% doesn't really matter as I am fundamentally opposed to students footing $1500 a year when the primary beneficiaries (us) pay a fraction of that cost.
2. Students really don't have a say in the matter. If they decided that they would rather have "big boy' football rather than smaller class sizes, more course offerings, more qualified faculty, than so be it. But right now, they don't really have any input into how their fees are allocated.
3. I just don't see any demand from the students for the move. None of them came here based on the promise that we would move up. Less than 10% of my students go to the games when I ask them in class.
4. Could the money be spent better elsewhere? Surveys are showing that soccer is moving up in terms of interest and that football is more of a sport for "old timers" like us. Combine that with the impending concussion liability, the future of college football doesn't look bright.
5. I just don't see the bang for the buck (except for those on this bbs who love football and like to see us mentioned on ESPN). Having taught at elite football programs (and having helped recruit student-athletes at those schools), I KNOW that we won't achieve the status that many people believe we will. Do you really think that people respect ODU/UMass/Marshall/App State/Ga Southern/etc. because they have moved up a level in football? Is Boise State, probably the best case example, respected? In reality, many of the BCS institutions just provide an excuse for the existence of their athletic programs.
6. I am very uncomfortable with the fact that we allow student-athletes who would not have made it in on their academic records in because they play sports. Yes, we are providing "at risk" students an opportunity to go to college, but we are also rejecting a similar number who really wanted to come here for the academic experience.
7. I really hate the bowl system and Beef O"Brady or Poulan Weedwacker Bowls that we aspire to play in.
8. Playoffs rule! Nobody really cares who wins a bowl game except for the top 5 games; in a playoff system, every game is meaningful.
9. Even moving up, we won't be able to compete like many believe we will. We have too many faculty who take pride in the quality of the classes they teach. I chuckle at coaches making statements like "they are visual learners" when their student-athletes score a 4 on the Wunderlich. That is code for "they can't read."
10. We may be able to outrecruit other FCS programs, but we will be at the bottom of the barrel in a tougher level of competition.

Lastly, and most importantly, I came to JMU because it is a special place with dedicated faculty, quality students, nice facilities, and a great location.. The last thing I want is to be like everyone else (especially ODU and Marshall).

I don't expect anyone to agree with me, but I do hope you try to understand my position.

I hope you don't teach philosophy, logic or anything to do with business writing...there are so many suppositions, emotional arguments, and logical errors in this I am having trouble comprehending that you are a professor at JMU...i appreciate that you work for JMU so please don't take it as disrespect - my JMU professors taught me not to write like this and to challenge such writing.

" I am fundamentally opposed to students footing $1500 a year when the primary beneficiaries (us) pay a fraction of that cost."
- how would you feel if that money went to faculty salary? most of college is not a la carte as many other posters have stated - on or off campus, meal plans, course load...sure, but once the money is in, it's in. would this be an issue at all if there were 0 fees, but tuition costs remained the same and athletics budget was presented as a % of total budget?

"Less than 10% of my students go to the games when I ask them in class."
- hmmm...sampling science - do your students represent some appropriate sample of the student body? any confounds to this - oh, maybe they know you don't like big-boy football so they won't raise their hand? or maybe they are opting out of the survey on their own...

"Surveys are showing that soccer is moving up in terms of interest and that football is more of a sport for "old timers" like us."
-surveys...surveys? sweet, what surveys? what does "moving up in terms of interest" MEAN? I am guessing its a % increase but still very small numbers when compared to football...nothing will come close to football, ever in this country. and by the way - our soccer teams have great facilities already. MMA and bull-riding are fast growing sports as well (when we look at %)..shall we add those? this is just a grasping-at-straws argument...football is probably the SLOWEST growing sport in terms of interest / percentage of new fans...why? it's in the #1 slot already.

"I am very uncomfortable with the fact that we allow student-athletes who would not have made it in on their academic records in because they play sports."
-while this is a great point...why cut off your nose to spite your face? 99% of colleges are like this, it's how the system works...let's not hold JMU back because Stanford, northwestern and notre dame are able to balance it out better than most

"The last thing I want is to be like everyone else (especially ODU and Marshall)."
........a little dramatic? eh? how on earth are we just like everybody else just because we have FBS football? does the rest the system and atmosphere and people that make jmu awesome completely fall apart and we turn into Marshall / ODUh? I don't think so...if you do, then you need to work harder to keep jmu special

(10-11-2013 03:06 PM)Phlegmish Wrote:  Good responses, but I think we should just agree to disagree. However, in response to #3, 33% attend games, but 100% pay $1500 each. How is that right?

This argument KILLS ME to hear over and over

We live in a FREE ECONOMY where supply and demand determine how we set tuition and fees . The more we can get on both while demand continues to rise -the better.

Students and parents are FREE to chose the school with the tuition and fee structure they like .not one of your students was forced to come to JMU .

I don't have to guess your not an Econ prof.

"Soccer.....it's like hockey, without the excitement"