Unfortunately and as often happens on here, the message is getting confused with one of the messengers. Would be interesting to see what the comments would be if a professor like the late Frank Henderson had co-written this.

Real simple answer, just roll the current personnel involved and the associated costs in this endeavor into the appropriate academic unit that reports to a dean versus an athletic administrator.

There isn't a problem to solve. However, rolling all academic programs into an academic setting sends a powerful message. Also, why do people keep painting a black and white picture - pro-atheletics and anti-athletics? I'm pro-athletics and know full well the benefits derived from them. That said, I'm not blindly loyal to the all mighty scoreboard.

Fair question and my answer has nothing to do with OU but colleges in general. APRs indicate those who leave with a diploma. I'd much prefer that they leave with an education and I think that will happen by integrating the center into an academic setting.

Well stated CA Bobcat! I completely agree.

I'd give Frank the same lines, minus the truths that are applicable to Ridpath being of poor character to judge ethics in sports. Anyone tossed from youth softball at the rec level should not be discussing ethics.

Exactly, UNC committed NO NCAA violations, those BS on-line classes were signed on to by the academic side. Our highly debated BSS (thread last month) was not created by athletics, but rather the academic side. So why the distrust in the athletic academic advisor? Actually the Athletic academic advisor is more well versed in their job than the University professor who loves teaching their subject, but fails to understand the actual general ed graduation requirements, and has never witnessed an OHIO Athletics event of any type, and has NO clue of the restraints each sport represents to scheduling.

I think LC is correct. Again, this is not an issue about the quality of education for athletics, it is a land grab, budget grab by some members of the faculty. Period. They can try to wrap it up by alluding to the UNC mess, which if you read and understand it, is not relevant at all, almost a counter. If this is typical of how this group thinks, then pity the student that wants to read, study, discuss and arrive at a thoughtful decision in their classroom. "Let's just find some quick reference that seems to support our position." I really hate to say this but maybe not fake news, but at least in the same category.

It has been going on since the 70's and probably will never stop. Apologies to OC, but the group think that stinks isn't a new invention for this faculty.

During the winter quarter when we had Wednesday away games I didn't take classes I knew would be a big challenge. I left those for fall and spring. Plus, I spoke to each professor and explained my situation and asked for their guidance to work around the travel. I never had any issues with that approach.

As I've said,when I competed,you were on your own.

I would have loved a facility like this if,for nothing else,a place to study in peace.

I think the usefulness of of an Academic Center depends on the individual student athlete.

From comments I've read,the current facility is well used,but undersized.
Sook will address that.

As for Sook also being a recruiting tool,so what.
It was paid for with 100% outside donations.

I do agree that the structure sends a powerful message. The current structure sends a powerful message that Ohio is committed to making sure that athletes succeed in the classroom as well as on the field, and that the athletic department stands with them on their educational mission, and will help guide them through the process. Change the structure and it sends a very different powerful message. To me, the new message would be that, once enrolled, while Ohio may have fine facilities, the athletic department would need to abandon student athletes, and could be of no further assistance in getting them an education. The student athletes would need to stand alone, against the academic forces of the University, with no assistance. If that's the message, the Sook would become a massive negative, rather than a positive.


This is a very peculiar answer. If a University is giving diplomas to people who are not qualified, that speaks to a problem on the academic side, either in terms of improper requirements, or in terms of measuring progress. What your answer is saying, at least to me, is that while the Academic side always has complete control over requirements to earn a diploma, and over measuring who is qualified to receive one, they aren't succeeding, even with complete control, so to remedy their failings we need to give them even more money and power.

Hopefully no one at Ohio is being awarded a diploma who isn't qualified to receive it, but if that is going on, it would seem that the Academic side should engage in self-evaluation, and modify things like the diploma requirements or course grading systems to correct the situation.

There is only one way, that I can think of that giving academics control over tutoring could lead to less "unqualified" people earning diplomas. Suppose that the tutoring done by the athletic department is so good that unqualified people are passing courses, and somehow managing to graduate. That could be "fixed" by giving the the students worse tutoring, and thus helping these "unqualified" students to fail. Voila - less "unqualified" people graduate. Let's hope that isn't what you are implying because every student should get the best possible chance of succeeding.

Thank you! I couldn't believe no one pointed this out. A truly laughable comparison.