menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Major Announcement
Page: 4 of 4
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 9/19/2014 1:58 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Totally great thread, in particular by Chip (nice point out on the columbus fans' ways), Dave and Bandit.

It's excellent that the new facility will be used for game day activities and to provide more convenience facilities (heads!) and food service.
Ohio69
General User
O69
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,124
person
mail
Ohio69
mail
Posted: 9/19/2014 2:44 PM
settings_applications edit_note
The Situation wrote:expand_more
...From my college experience I will say the segregation of athletes from the student population has very little to do with exclusive amenities and very much to do with human nature (and people's attraction to like minded individuals)....

Didn't the NCAA outlaw athletic dorms after they got completely out of control?
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 9/19/2014 3:10 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
Didn't the NCAA outlaw athletic dorms after they got completely out of control?

Would it be surprising if the P5 permits special deluxe housing for athletes? After all, they will be paid/professional athletes, they shouldn't have to live in a common dorm, should they?
cincybobcat99
General User
C99
Member Since: 11/8/2007
Post Count: 192
person
mail
cincybobcat99
mail
Posted: 9/19/2014 3:53 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
...From my college experience I will say the segregation of athletes from the student population has very little to do with exclusive amenities and very much to do with human nature (and people's attraction to like minded individuals)....

Didn't the NCAA outlaw athletic dorms after they got completely out of control?
I don't think so, at least somebody forgot to tell Kentucky.

http://www.kentucky.com/2012/09/18/2341375/new-mens-baske...
perimeterpost
General User
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 3,165
mail
perimeterpost
mail
Posted: 9/19/2014 6:18 PM
settings_applications edit_note
OU is investing $32 million in to upgrading McCracken Hall that serves approx. 1,600 Education majors. Do we really need to spend that amount of money on that number of students?

In context $5m worth of private donations for an academic building for 500 students doesn't seem all that strange.
Beat Michigan
General User
Member Since: 8/15/2013
Location: Almost Heaven
Post Count: 245
mail
Beat Michigan
mail
Posted: 9/19/2014 7:18 PM
settings_applications edit_note
perimeterpost wrote:expand_more
OU is investing $32 million in to upgrading McCracken Hall that serves approx. 1,600 Education majors. Do we really need to spend that amount of money on that number of students?

In context $5m worth of private donations for an academic building for 500 students doesn't seem all that strange.
Agree,
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,611
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 9:03 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Good point. Ultimately, with the bulk here being private donations most criticism should be mute.

edit:

Unrelated to my above comment. I was looking at the Ohio Bobcat Club priority points. I notice a $100 contribution to the Annual Fund earns you 3 priority points. A $100 contribution towards capital projects (like this?) is worth 1.5 priority points. I am not criticizing this setup, just curious behind the reasoning behind the annual fund donations being stressed over the special projects. My assumption going in was that one-time gifts towards something like this would be worth more priority points since they don't count towards annual seating benefits, especially with some on this board commented on how difficult of a time we had raising money for the fieldhouse and locker rooms.
Thanks
Last Edited: 9/20/2014 9:13:30 AM by The Optimist
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,663
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 9:23 AM
settings_applications edit_note
I wonder if O.U. will do the same thing they did for the IPF of having a plaque with names of donors who give certain amount ?
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,801
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 9:33 AM
settings_applications edit_note
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
I wonder if O.U. will do the same thing they did for the IPF of having a plaque with names of donors who give certain amount ?

Read the brochure
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,801
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 9:34 AM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Didn't the NCAA outlaw athletic dorms after they got completely out of control?

Would it be surprising if the P5 permits special deluxe housing for athletes? After all, they will be paid/professional athletes, they shouldn't have to live in a common dorm, should they?
Athletic dorms are outlawed, however there are ways around this, like anything else.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,801
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 9:37 AM
settings_applications edit_note
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
Good point. Ultimately, with the bulk here being private donations most criticism should be mute.

edit:

Unrelated to my above comment. I was looking at the Ohio Bobcat Club priority points. I notice a $100 contribution to the Annual Fund earns you 3 priority points. A $100 contribution towards capital projects (like this?) is worth 1.5 priority points. I am not criticizing this setup, just curious behind the reasoning behind the annual fund donations being stressed over the special projects. My assumption going in was that one-time gifts towards something like this would be worth more priority points since they don't count towards annual seating benefits, especially with some on this board commented on how difficult of a time we had raising money for the fieldhouse and locker rooms.
Thanks
Because the donations to the General Fund of the Bobcat Club, is thei slush money! This is what covers sending kids to summer school and other various discretionary projects. Donating to locker rooms or purchasing equipment for specific sports does not benefit the department, only a sport.
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,611
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 10:09 AM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Good point. Ultimately, with the bulk here being private donations most criticism should be mute.

edit:

Unrelated to my above comment. I was looking at the Ohio Bobcat Club priority points. I notice a $100 contribution to the Annual Fund earns you 3 priority points. A $100 contribution towards capital projects (like this?) is worth 1.5 priority points. I am not criticizing this setup, just curious behind the reasoning behind the annual fund donations being stressed over the special projects. My assumption going in was that one-time gifts towards something like this would be worth more priority points since they don't count towards annual seating benefits, especially with some on this board commented on how difficult of a time we had raising money for the fieldhouse and locker rooms.
Thanks
Because the donations to the General Fund of the Bobcat Club, is thei slush money! This is what covers sending kids to summer school and other various discretionary projects. Donating to locker rooms or purchasing equipment for specific sports does not benefit the department, only a sport.
I see what you are saying for locker rooms or equipment, but for the IPF and this academic center, a major selling point is that it benefits all the sports. All of our athletes will use this center, right? To me, that seems like a gift to the program and not just a specific sport.
D.A.
General User
DA
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,198
person
mail
D.A.
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 11:40 AM
settings_applications edit_note
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
Good point. Ultimately, with the bulk here being private donations most criticism should be mute.

edit:

Unrelated to my above comment. I was looking at the Ohio Bobcat Club priority points. I notice a $100 contribution to the Annual Fund earns you 3 priority points. A $100 contribution towards capital projects (like this?) is worth 1.5 priority points. I am not criticizing this setup, just curious behind the reasoning behind the annual fund donations being stressed over the special projects. My assumption going in was that one-time gifts towards something like this would be worth more priority points since they don't count towards annual seating benefits, especially with some on this board commented on how difficult of a time we had raising money for the fieldhouse and locker rooms.
Thanks
Directed funds (gifts for a specific initiative) are important and receive points, but gifts to the general fund allow the athletic department to allocate the funds to where they need to offset their daily needs/operating budget. (ex: if field hockey makes the NCAA tournament, that is likely something that is not budgeted for annually, and the general funds could be used to offset those unbudgeted costs) Hopefully that makes sense.
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,611
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 11:44 AM
settings_applications edit_note
D.A. wrote:expand_more
Good point. Ultimately, with the bulk here being private donations most criticism should be mute.

edit:

Unrelated to my above comment. I was looking at the Ohio Bobcat Club priority points. I notice a $100 contribution to the Annual Fund earns you 3 priority points. A $100 contribution towards capital projects (like this?) is worth 1.5 priority points. I am not criticizing this setup, just curious behind the reasoning behind the annual fund donations being stressed over the special projects. My assumption going in was that one-time gifts towards something like this would be worth more priority points since they don't count towards annual seating benefits, especially with some on this board commented on how difficult of a time we had raising money for the fieldhouse and locker rooms.
Thanks
Directed funds (gifts for a specific initiative) are important and receive points, but gifts to the general fund allow the athletic department to allocate the funds to where they need to offset their daily needs/operating budget. (ex: if field hockey makes the NCAA tournament, that is likely something that is not budgeted for annually, and the general funds could be used to offset those unbudgeted costs) Hopefully that makes sense.

That does make sense. Max flexibility for the AD.
OUPride
General User
OUP
Member Since: 9/21/2010
Post Count: 578
person
mail
OUPride
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 12:54 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Serious question: Why do varsity athletes need a $5.5 million building for academic help? Why do they need extra facilities the rest of the student body cannot access?

My primary answer would be, because varsity athletes have a major time commitment that other students do not have, and it puts them at a disadvantage academically, yet they are expected to compete anyway. A facility like this is an attempt to help them study more efficiently, helping to level the playing ground.

A more cynical answer would be, because everyone has one, and if you don't, you are at a recruiting disadvantage.
The even more cynical answer would be that a significant portion of D1 football players are in no way imaginable prepared to enter and compete in a competitive university.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 9/20/2014 3:02 PM
settings_applications edit_note
OUPride wrote:expand_more
The even more cynical answer would be that a significant portion of D1 football players are in no way imaginable prepared to enter and compete in a competitive university.

I don't think that's a cynical answer. I'd say it's accurate that a portion of the athletes, both football and basketball, and probably some other sports, are not prepared for the university level. The university, once it awards them a scholarship, then owes them an obligation to provide them with an education. Gone are the days when athletes "ain't come to play school" and are placed in courses like "Basket Weaving 101" and "Rocks and Stars" or are given passing grades just because.

Instead, now the university tries to uphold it's side of the deal, and provides them with tutoring and monitoring in order to make sure they get whatever remedial training they need, and that they have proper academic discipline and actually go to class. In the end, because these student-athletes do end up with an actual education and diploma, sports in its own way is probably one of the most effective affirmative action programs there is.

Despite that special need for certain football and basketball players, I don't think it's accurate to think that this is the only reason for the facility. Remember that even though this facility is attached to Peden, it will serve athletes from all sports, both men and women.
Last Edited: 9/20/2014 3:04:36 PM by L.C.
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,559
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 9/21/2014 12:44 AM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
The even more cynical answer would be that a significant portion of D1 football players are in no way imaginable prepared to enter and compete in a competitive university.

I don't think that's a cynical answer. I'd say it's accurate that a portion of the athletes, both football and basketball, and probably some other sports, are not prepared for the university level. The university, once it awards them a scholarship, then owes them an obligation to provide them with an education. Gone are the days when athletes "ain't come to play school" and are placed in courses like "Basket Weaving 101" and "Rocks and Stars" or are given passing grades just because.
I don't know about you, but I took courses in both Astronomy and Geology and both were very hard! I would imagine that Rocks and Stars is some weird Astronomy/Geology Hybrid and would be mega-hard!
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,821
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 9/22/2014 9:59 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
The even more cynical answer would be that a significant portion of D1 football players are in no way imaginable prepared to enter and compete in a competitive university.

I don't think that's a cynical answer. I'd say it's accurate that a portion of the athletes, both football and basketball, and probably some other sports, are not prepared for the university level. The university, once it awards them a scholarship, then owes them an obligation to provide them with an education. Gone are the days when athletes "ain't come to play school" and are placed in courses like "Basket Weaving 101" and "Rocks and Stars" or are given passing grades just because.
I don't know about you, but I took courses in both Astronomy and Geology and both were very hard! I would imagine that Rocks and Stars is some weird Astronomy/Geology Hybrid and would be mega-hard!
The Mobile Earth class I took was no joke.
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,611
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 9/22/2014 8:25 PM
settings_applications edit_note
A-townBound
General User
Member Since: 3/31/2012
Location: Georgetown, KY
Post Count: 672
mail
A-townBound
mail
Posted: 9/22/2014 8:40 PM
settings_applications edit_note
cincybobcat99 wrote:expand_more
...From my college experience I will say the segregation of athletes from the student population has very little to do with exclusive amenities and very much to do with human nature (and people's attraction to like minded individuals)....

Didn't the NCAA outlaw athletic dorms after they got completely out of control?
I don't think so, at least somebody forgot to tell Kentucky.

http://www.kentucky.com/2012/09/18/2341375/new-mens-baske...
Yes, UK has had a Wildcat Lodge that houses the men's basketball team since 1978, The former was razed in 2012 when the facility at the link above replace it. Old facility - http://ukcc.uky.edu/cgi-bin/dynamo?maps.391+campus+0242
Last Edited: 9/22/2014 8:58:59 PM by A-townBound
sargentfan
General User
S
Member Since: 3/17/2005
Post Count: 917
person
mail
sargentfan
mail
Posted: 9/23/2014 10:33 AM
settings_applications edit_note
From what I had heard UK basically has a Basketball player dorm, but gets around it by having a percentage of the dorm filled by non-athletes. But more than likely it probably tightly controls who gets in.
D.A.
General User
DA
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,198
person
mail
D.A.
mail
Posted: 6/11/2015 1:37 PM
settings_applications edit_note
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/6/11/876168...

Not that OHIO is Notre Dame, but this is one of many reasons that the Academic Center is a necessary resource. I think we would all like to think that every student athlete is going to be on the same academic level as your run of the mill student, but the reality is that isn't the case. However, with the investment in the Academic Center, we can do our level best to make sure that coming out of school, each student athlete is on par or exceeding the run of the mill student in the classroom. IMHO, that is a noble cause.
Showing Messages: 76 - 97 of 97
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)