BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Basketball

Topic: Stirring The Pot

Topic: Stirring The Pot

Author

Message

Panda
General User

Member Since: 12/22/2004
Post Count: 280

Status: Offline

Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 9:49:14 AM

It seems that our Distinguished Professor of Economics Dr. Richard Vedder is wanting more public attention. His recent article in the Athens News and Post (July 31, 2011) and a public question/answer production on student fees and athletics are very interesting and yet very alarming. The faculty senate will jump on this. President McDavis and AD Schaus need to reload and handle quickly.

As I said many months ago there are certain members of the Ohio faculty that will lead an intellectual attack on athletics. It is now here! How are we going to react??

Last Edited: 1/31/2011 9:56:23 AM by Panda

Panda

OhioCatFan
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,777

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 10:11:39 AM

This is not an intellectual attack. It is based on very flawed survey methodology. Let me quote the relevant paragraph buried deep in the story:

"The survey was conducted online, with an e-mail sent to 19,843 possible participants. Of the 19,843 possible participants in the study, 1,175 completed at least a portion of the survey. The final sample of students who completed the entire survey was 910. More than two-thirds of the participants were undergraduates, and 32.1 were graduate students."

Ignoring the issue of over-representation of graduate students, this survey had a woeful response rate of 4.5 percent. For this kind of online survey, which is very much like a mail-in survey for methodological purposes, one needs a very high (75 percent or so) response rate to allow any conclusions to be drawn about the statistical universe being sampled (i.e., the whole student body). A much better methodology is actually to draw a random sample of students (about 500 would more than do) and then call them and ask them the survey questions over the phone. Or, work very hard to get significant numbers of this 500-person sample to answer an online survey. A major methodological problem with the type of online survey conducted here is a phenomenon known as "self selection into the sample." Simply put this means that the researcher does not select the sample but respondents choose whether or not to participate. As a general rule what happens in this situation is that you get a survey of extreme positions. In other words, those motivated to participate tend to be have strong opinions on the issue -- either for or against. You tend to miss those in the middle ground who care less passionately.

For academics to tout such a survey as a "research study" is laughable. I know Rich Vedder, and respect him and consider him a friend, but let me suggest thet he stick to a subject he knows better -- economics. If he wants to do a legitimate survey, I suggest he contact the Bush Research Insititute in the School of Journalism. I believe Guido Stempel, emeritus professor, is still active with it. He's a nationally recognized expert in this area.

Last Edited: 1/31/2011 7:46:14 PM by OhioCatFan

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Bobcat Love
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 1,193

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 10:12:21 AM

Did he come up with his theories before or after he advised Vladamir Putin on how to turn a Democracy back into an Authoritarian State?

I've heard enough from him. He's a talking head who chooses quantity over quality of words.

We will listen to his theories when his fellow faculty members cease to provide days upon days of headlines containing scandals and nefarious activity, instead focusing on nationally recognized academic output.

Right now, I've yet to hear anything even close to substantial in the form of Nationally Recognized Academic Output over the past 5 years. On the flip side, I think its clear we can find scandal after scandal from his peers.

You may be able to silence Mikhail Khodorkovsky, but you will NOT silence Bobcat LOVE.

Voice of Reason
General User

Member Since: 7/28/2010
Post Count: 249

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 1:13:12 PM

Dr. Vedder seems to me like a hired gun. Apparently if you are a "renowned" economist you are in a position to be the end all be all opinion on the accuracy and legitimacy of a study or survey. I realize he may be an accomplished individual, but he clearly has an agenda. Anytime a study or survey is released that makes our athletic department look good, he is there to tear it apart. Meanwhile, if you make a claim that the athletic department is supporting child labor in India with the general fees money it is receiving he will probably find a way to support it and rave about the manner in which the study was conducted.

He ripped the study that Graduate Students of the Sports Administration program released regarding the financial impact of Ohio Athletics which was done under the supervision and guidance of other individuals considered by the University to be experts in research methods. Are there other methods by which the study could have been conducted in order to improve accuracy and address areas of weakness? Absolutely! Is that feasible? Probably not. I am sure an expert on research that has a bias toward college athletics could easily rip the method with which this new study was conducted.

Vedder clearly has an agenda against athletics. That agenda is his priority, not the students that he poses to be so concerned about. That is evident in his lack of hesitation to throw those students and their research under the bus and publicly attack their work the second they try to oppose his agenda. The simple fact that the man wouldn't even acknowledge the fact that Ohio Athletics provides a financial impact to the University and the Athens area shows that he is simply out to smear athletics. He won't give them credit for anything!

SBH
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,292

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 1:26:32 PM

It's up to alumni to respond with letters to the editor, op-ed pieces, etc.

I wonder what percentage of his survey respondents know that their tuition dollars are underwriting economics courses that they never have any need for or interest in?

Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,062

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 3:58:31 PM

As cuts get closer and closer to tenured positions, this raging against athletics will only get worse. We haven't seen nothing yet.

Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,734

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 4:28:35 PM

The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind. The answer is blowing in the wind.

There was an excelllent article in a recent NYTimes that talked about private donors and what they do for you. They cited a UConn football booster who demanded 3M back because they didn't consult him when hiring a new coach. They also cited Phil Knight and his largess to the Oregon program and Pickens to OKie State. Our answer is to get more private donors to squelch this talk amidst budget cuts.

Mike Coleman
Administrator

Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Near the Pristine Sandy Shores of Lake Erie, OH
Post Count: 1,645

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 1/31/2011 4:35:38 PM

giacomo wrote:

I think it would be interesting to have a bigtime donor step up and, in one of the most generous gifts of alltime to students, cover the general fee for three years. All these students would be able to save a few hundred a year, and athletics would operate without any general fee assistance. Now, if you believe the anti-athletics crowd, the financial health of the university would dramatically improve and students would be much happier as well. Of course, this is the anti-athletics crowd's worst nightmare, as it would more likely prove that the real reason for the financial turmoil has absolutely nothing to do with athletics but more likely their own tenure and retirement programs.

Andrew Ruck
General User

Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,233

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 8:22:50 AM

I had Vedder as a professor. Weird dude, but I don't recall any mention of athletics. I do recall a lot of admiration for classical music. Maybe someone can make up a study to look like we waste money on music to hit back.

Andrew Ruck
B.B.A. 2003

Ryan Carey
Site Programmer

Member Since: 11/11/2004
Post Count: 976

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 8:30:09 AM

I remember a lot of porn references myself! Seriously!

Ryan M. Carey
BBA 2001

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,208

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 11:24:51 AM

Quote:

In fiscal year 2010, Athletics received about $12.7 million from the General Fee, or $765 per full-time student. Next year, that amount will increase to about $15 million, or 47.6 percent of the Gen- eral Fee.

This is an excerpt of what Alan pulled out of the article over on the football board. The operating budget for athletics is basically calculated by a formula of General Fee+Scholarships paid+Revenue. That total was about 21 million for 2010 so based on the increase in tuition and general fee it looks like our athletic budget will be around 24 million for 2011. Ohio spent close to 8 million on football in 2010 (second highest in the MAC behind Temple) yet is increasing the athletics budget by another 3 million in 2011 do you think basketball is going to start receiving a budget increase? Is the extra 200,000 spent per CAA/Horizon basketball school over the MAC (though Ohio would be in the upper quartile in those leagues) mean that Ohio has to reallocate football money to basketball? Its pretty obvious to me that 1) money is available and 2) with Ohio hosting 20 schools at home this year in basketball instead of going on the road for paydays that enough money/commitment is there by the leadership in basketball. Some of the 10 million dollars in private donation money is earmarked for Convo renovations. I'm definitely not against spending more even if necessary on basketball (especially if you are talking about dropping some money on an assistant coach that teaches D) but its clear to me that this years futility in basketball is due to coaching issues and not money.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,208

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 12:09:44 PM

SBH wrote:

I wonder what percentage of his survey respondents know that their tuition dollars are underwriting economics courses that they never have any need for or interest in?

You're hitting on some good points here. Vedder's sampling method only proves 1 thing and something we universally know on here already is that less than 10% made the decision to attend OU based on its athletic stature in D1. If you ask a second question to the students in that would you be prepared to have the athletic department drop to DII because of cuts 40% do not agree with it. Ask the same poll question to the faculty which wants every competitive edge it can get to retain students and 70% probably would be against a drop to DII. Now ask representatives of the Athens Chamber of Commerce if they would like to see Ohio drop to DII in athletics an I would be near unanimously they would be against it. I'm not sure if D1 athletics or increasing the school by 11% in enrollment is really the best for the undergraduate experience but the undergraduate is now only just one player in the overall economic model they buy into. OU has 34,000 system wide students of which only half now are undergraduates on the Athens campus. Through in professors, active alumni and really anybody who makes a living supporting students then main campus undergraduates represent at most 1/3 of the OU stakeholders. Even if they put dropping to DII to a vote and 51% said yes that is only 1/6 of stakeholders wanting a move down. I could see enough pressure placed on the ICA to put a cap on general fee spending and that may be why athletics is pushing to get such a big increase before the climate potentially changes. The athletics budget is now moving closer to the upper quartile of schools with the peer FBS leagues and anything more without a huge donor uptick is probably not going to be needed.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Jeff McKinney
Moderator

Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,155

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 12:39:10 PM

My guess is a lot of people involved in this study don't know the difference between FCS and Division II. Notice also that the Post article used the word "ranking" as a Division I program; the proper term would be "classification", since one is not "ranked" in their respective classification.

Some good food for thought on this thread. As Ohio 69 posted, in the days ahead I'm sure that we will be drawn further into the debates over this issue.

I also think the future viability of mid major Div. I athletic programs possibly could rest on their ability to find a substitute source of funding for the student fees stream. However, it may be very hard for most mid major programs to equal student fees with private fundraising, with the exception being if a few individual donors come up with major donations.

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,208

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 1:26:50 PM

Jeff McKinney wrote:

I also think the future viability of mid major Div. I athletic programs possibly could rest on their ability to find a substitute source of funding for the student fees stream. However, it may be very hard for most mid major programs to equal student fees with private fundraising, with the exception being if a few individual donors come up with major donations.

No I think universities are widely in concensus that athletic spending is getting out of hand. At Fresno State they are cutting Patt Hill's salary from 1.2 million back to 800,000. Coaches overpaid at the non-BCS level are going to get walked back down in salary. As far as the student fees go, I think the celing is maybe about 10% of the tuition rate after which they become a major factor in the price to attend a university. Fees are not at that level yet and the highest by percentage of operating budget in the MAC is Eastern Michigan at 8% (Ohio is at about 3.5%). Economic factors right now are not conducive to escalating budgets and salaries. MAC schools have upped the salaries to 300-400k for football and basketball coaches to make sure they can stil land BCS assistants but with BCS salaries probably stagnating or on the way down I wouldn't worry too much about escalation. The only MAC school that is potentially in danger of bowing out of DI over budget concerns is Eastern Michigan which has competitive issues in football and basketball at the MAC level to go with the ballooning studenf fees. Ohio is big enough financially at 34,000 system wide students along with solid support in both football and basketball that I don't forsee a move to drop down to DI or FCS for that matter as sensible.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,208

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 1:49:15 PM

Jeff McKinney wrote:

Some good food for thought on this thread. As Ohio 69 posted, in the days ahead I'm sure that we will be drawn further into the debates over this issue.

I don't really see what there is to discuss. Aside from pending budget cuts (which are happening at all schools across the country) there isn't trends that alarm for concern. The budget cut climate is going to lead to a de-escalation in coaching salaries and athletic expenditures from the top/biggest abusers on down. Ohio's generally been responsible and benefit in relative terms. The solution to budget cuts is higher tuition and part of the reason Ohio is looking at such steep budget cuts is because of the compact Ted Strickland had with the state to keep tuition costs down at state universities for 2 years in return for more state support. With the state budget future in turmoil Ohio will just have to go back to the 7-8 percent tuition increases under Glidden to make up for shortfalls, which in turn will increase the size of the athletic budget even more. If you've ever noted higher athletic budgets at some of the private CUSA schools like SMU and Tulsa it has to do with a higher tuition for its student body. The fact that Miami Universities football budget is significantly smaller than Ohio's yet they charge significantly more for tuition shows just how much money is being pumped into Ohio athletics today compared to even other schools in the MAC.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

SBH
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,292

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 2:51:38 PM

My understanding (perhaps flawed) of the budget crisis at OU, however, is that we are in bigger trouble than most schools because of a misinterpretation of the new state funding formula regarding enrollment growth. We somehow missed a few fundamental benchmarks a year or two ago that ended up costing us millions in subsidies. Is this correct or did I dream it?

Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,233

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 2:58:22 PM

The ultimate "survey" would be for a group to run for student senate on the anti-fee platform. If this were a period of activism that would probably happen. With such fragmentation in the youth market/culture today, I doubt if this would happen. I can just hear their campaign song now - Another Brick in the Wall with the "we don't need no education" lyrics modified to fit their anti-fee cause.

Andrew Ruck
General User

Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,233

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 3:07:43 PM

Yes...And he seemed way too interested in the attractive young ladies of the class...

Andrew Ruck
B.B.A. 2003

Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,062

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/1/2011 4:39:47 PM

SBH wrote:

I am no expert nor involved in university budget meetings, but I haven't heard this discussed as an issue on campus.

Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

BobcatRugby
General User

Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 11

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/2/2011 1:18:56 PM

Wes wrote:

The operating budget for athletics is basically calculated by a formula of General Fee+Scholarships paid+Revenue.

So, let me get this straight... Athletics gets $15 million in General Fee money. From that, they cough-up around $6.5 million in scholarships (which, by the way, goes to the university's General Fund/Academics). That leaves the department with $8.5 million. Add to that the money they make through various avenues (sponsorships, tickets, football guarantees, etc.) which I think is over $3 million. That should leave the department with about $11.5 - $12 million to cover everything else (including salaries).

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is about a $12 million budget.

PutnamField
General User

Member Since: 9/20/2007
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 303

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/2/2011 2:23:09 PM

BobcatRugby wrote:

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is about a $12 million budget.

That's around one third of the city of Athens budget. Therefore, it'd run a city of around 8,000 to 10,000 souls. Like, almost the size of Bexley or Circleville. Not chump change.

BobcatRugby
General User

Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 11

Status: Offline

RE: Stirring The Pot

Posted: 2/2/2011 2:41:12 PM

PutnamField wrote:

BobcatRugby wrote:

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is about a $12 million budget.

That's around one third of the city of Athens budget. Therefore, it'd run a city of around 8,000 to 10,000 souls. Like, almost the size of Bexley or Circleville. Not chump change.

Good point, Putnam. I didn't mean to imply that is was chump change. I guess I was just trying to figure out why some people think the budget is so much higher than it might actually be.

Showing Replies:	1 - 22 of 22 Posts
Jump to Page:	1

View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics

There are 219 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

218 Guests
1 Registered User:
	chauncey1

There are no other users looking at this page.