What if in reality the University’s athletic department was self-sufficient? I mean, we hear it all the time that they are, but the numbers and facts just don’t add up. But aside from that, what if it became a reality?
And I am not talking financial independence from the academic side of things. I am talking about what if the athletic department was completely independent from state support and became its own non-University-affiliated private entity? Think about this for a moment.
On the one hand, you would have the athletic department become solely dependent on donations, television deals and advertiser support (plus whatever else) — no more public dollars for sports. After reading the Emerald the other day on donors covering the operational costs of the John E. Jaqua Academic Center for Student Athletes (ODE, 1/18/2012), the thought struck me: Athletics doesn’t, per se, need the University — or vice versa.
If you are running the athletic department and it was free from the University and the public, this is what you would get: No more criticism from the academic side of things about how you operate or when you have games during the academic year. No more campus criticism on what colors your team decided to wear on game day or what type of uniform design will be on display. No more fear of having to worry about others expressing dissatisfaction at how much Phil or Nike gives to or influences your department. No more worrying over scrutiny about how much your coaches and staff are paid. No need to answer questions about facility upgrades or expansions. No concern about using public land for athletic purposes. No reason to sell discounted tickets to students.
And on the other hand, the academic side of things becomes exactly what the University, according to its mission statement, is supposed to be: A community of scholars dedicated to the highest standards of academic inquiry, learning and service (plus much more). Nowhere in this mission statement does it mention athletics in any way, shape or form.
Regardless of how the University ends up being financially operated (you already know what I think about this, ODE, 12/5/2011), with the athletic department cut cleanly from it, it would get benefits as well: No more having to criticize the athletic department with how it operates. No worries over whether it becomes a financial drain (Matthew Knight Arena?) or success since, with the latter, they don’t give anything financially back for their association with the University (and don’t tell me you just want students here due to the football team’s popularity). No thought about whether the University is sacrificing itself for the benefit of athletics. No more concern about whether students come based solely on the football team’s popularity (see above note). No need to scrutinize donor priorities of athletics to the detriment of academics (ODE, 2/15/2011). @@How do we style these for print, Kenny?@@

College education, too, would not be a requirement for athletes just out of high school to play. Does that mean such an education is unimportant? Of course not. If there were people who were playing for this department, there might be scholarships that would enable them to get a degree. But to make it mandatory for these athletes to get a college education? That might be more than is required. I mean, if I was a highly sought after non-American football player (if the athletic department ever decided to add this, like many of the Pac-12), I would want to focus exclusively on that (and get paid by this independent entity) with the option to get a college degree.
On the academic side of things: With the major draw of students and faculty now dependent on the quality of the education provided — with no more concern for athletics — the University can start building a stronger academic reputation, one that could rival the Ivy League schools.@@Really?@@ These schools don’t attract students and faculty based on the popularity of their athletic department. The quality of the education is without a doubt the single most important draw of these schools, and athletics has, I would say, next to zero to do with it. As institutions of higher learning, I think it would be safe to say that they have their priorities squared away.
This split would probably only work, however, if all the other Division I, II and III schools went along with it, with the NCAA renaming itself to something non-college related. With these divisions’ athletic departments pretty well established now, I am sure it would only take time before this becomes a reality.
Of course, one effect of this separation would be that University students could no longer call themselves Ducks. They would have to settle for University graduates.