(02-24-2021 09:02 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(02-23-2021 09:51 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2021 09:10 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  Sorry for the months old bump, but I'm just gonna leave this interesting take here:

https://www.pilotonline.com/opinion/colu...story.html

LOL, W&M trying to become the new URI:
https://www.golocalprov.com/sports/edito...all-at-uri

It’s an absurd article/idea. W&M FB is endowed, and as I understand it the 7 sports originally cut have been restored with an effort to endow their costs. The article to me is nothing more than the bile of a FB/sports hater.

The article is just about football leading to CTE, right? Not really related to the economics of it.

(02-24-2021 09:59 AM)jmuwyhamhgawd Wrote:  

(02-24-2021 09:02 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(02-23-2021 09:51 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(02-23-2021 09:10 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  Sorry for the months old bump, but I'm just gonna leave this interesting take here:

https://www.pilotonline.com/opinion/colu...story.html

LOL, W&M trying to become the new URI:
https://www.golocalprov.com/sports/edito...all-at-uri

It’s an absurd article/idea. W&M FB is endowed, and as I understand it the 7 sports originally cut have been restored with an effort to endow their costs. The article to me is nothing more than the bile of a FB/sports hater.

The article is just about football leading to CTE, right? Not really related to the economics of it.

where to even start with this?

- when you cut sports, you know there is going to be blow back. if you are going to buckle under the blow back, why put yourself through that pain excercise?

- everything in life is risk / rewards and tradeoffs. football comes with risks (cte, capital investment etc), but do the benefits (school spirit, fundraising, development of young men) out weigh those risks? the author does not address everything W&M would be giving up by cancelling football. you may feel that the downsides outweigh the benefits, but at least be intellectually honest. what a garbage opinion piece. this guy has his PHD? not impressed

The sport cutting was under then-AD Huge who comes across as pretty cut-throat. My understanding is she was attempting to eliminate those sports under the guise of covid (as many universities have during the pandemic), but it was really about her wanting to redirect more funding to revenue sports. The W&M alumni community was having NONE of it and the intense pressure on her and President Rose resulted in Huge’s ouster. Once she was gone, their administration reinstated the teams with some clear fundraising targets for each sport.

This professor is just another in a long line of W&M profs beating their anti-football drum. The CTE argument is strong, but the personal choice argument is stronger and will win out IMO.

It was a terribly written article. You start with saying other sports cut for economic reasons (which I'm pretty sure are BS, but that's a different story), and then say football should be cut, not because of economic reasons (it's the most expensive and almost never turns a profit) but for health concerns. What a disconnect! And this guy is a professor? Glad he isn't an English professor I suppose.