Fund athletic progress, not failureIn response to the article, “Fowler wants more support from student fees” here is a novel idea: win games.
Our Athletic Director is quoted as whining that “I just like to be on a level playing field with UNC,” while neglecting to mention that UNC-Chapel Hill dominates the ACC in the majority of athletics and N.C. State is pathetic in almost every sport. During Fowler’s tenure, NCSU has finished in the bottom half (winning percentage) in 15 of the 21 sports we compete in. We are ninth (out of the 12 ACC schools) in conference championship sports during Fowler’s nine years as AD. UNC-CH is first.
Despite this, our athletic director wants students to pay a 28 percent increase in fees for teams that do not win. Last week, an article in the Wall Street Journal highlighted Bobby Purcell, the director of our Wolfpack Club, as one of the best in the country.
In the year 2004 Purcell raised $25.8 million, compared to $15.9 million raised by UNC’s Rams Club. Despite raising almost $10 million more than UNC-CH, State lost that year in both football and basketball, and since then we have had very limited success against our archrival.
Even more incriminating, last year our athletics program finished 53rd out of 66 BCS schools in the intercollegiate Director’s Cup (an overall ranking of the sports in a school’s athletics department). UNC finished 14th.
When will Fowler be held accountable for his job PERFORMANCE? I hope it’s before we even consider another athletics fee increase.
David Thomassenior, business management
Fowler’s request doesn’t add upMaybe it’s just that I only hear bad news about the economy these days, but something doesn’t add up with Lee Fowler’s request for more money via student fees.
Doing some quick math with numbers provided by Wikipedia (which are confirmed by each of the universities’ Web sites), N.C. State has a total of 31,130 students while UNC-Chapel Hill has a total of 25,805.
Our University’s 31,130 students multiplied by $195 is $6,070,350 while UNC’s 25,805 students multiplied by $250 is $6,451,250, meaning that UNC gets about $400,000 more per year for the athletic department than NCSU from student fees. This $400,000 represents about 6.3 percent of the amount currently provided to our Athletics Department by student fees. I have two questions here.
How will $400,000 more per year build a new playing surface at Carter-Finley Stadium, renovate the east stands and concourse, renovate the outdoor tennis facility, build a new press box and new entrances to the our soccer stadium, and, my personal favorites, build new video scoreboards for Reynolds Coliseum and Doak Field?
My second question is if Fowler only wants what Carolina gets, why is he asking for a 28.2 percent increase rather than a 6.3 percent increase?
My final point is this ECU has 25,699 students. Multiplied by their student fee of $500, the ECU athletic department is collecting $12,849,500 from student fees. This is more than double what we provide to the athletic department.
It is just a shame that our University will never “be competitive” with ECU. I guess except for in football (30-24), volleyball (3-2) and cross country (sweeping the Wolfpack Invitational, or for those of you that understand cross country scoring: N.C. State men 15, ECU men 64 and the NC State women 15 and ECU women 51).
Mark Osbornegraduate student, mechanical engineering
Economic woes a result of other institutionsI am writing this letter is response to the article in the Technician yesterday about how “the economy has done nothing but decline since George Bush has been in office.”
I am sick and tired of George Bush taking the rap for the economy, gas prices and unemployment rates. I want to present some facts about the economy, gas prices and unemployment.
Over the last five years, the Dow Jones, Nasdaq and S&P 500 averages have done nothing but grow.
Until about 2008, where the sharp drop-off starts, the growth of each of these companies has been really steady in an upward direction. So if the economy is represented by the stock markets, then it has not “declined since George Bush has been in office.”
If you look at fuel prices over the last 10 years, they have steadily increased. However, the sharpest increase in fuel prices has come over the last two years. Unemployment rates have, aside from the 2001 recession, declined until about 2006 when the unemployment rates went back up.
What changed in 2006 that has seemed to have made these dramatic changes? The Democrats have taken over Congress. Honestly, George Bush has little to no power aside from influencing the public and having a veto, which can be overridden.
If you want to find someone to blame for the misfortunes of our economy, blame either Congress or the Fed. The House of Representatives controls appropriations and the Fed controls the interest rate and inflation. Start getting angry at them if you want something to change. As for the misfortunes in the last two years, make your own judgment. Weston Strakafreshman, materials science and engineering
