At first it was a group of students who called for change. No one really took them seriously, and despite their encampment on the front lawn of Johnson Hall and some token changes, which were quickly repealed, everything stayed the same. Then some of the University’s top faculty members, including English Professor James Earl, started to express their concerns at what they saw as a serious threat to academics. Earl went so far as to draft a resolution that has been adopted by most schools of the Pacific-10 Conference.
That received some notice, but the situation stayed mostly the same.
Then the Knight Commission revealed its own findings, which suggested that there was indeed a problem. And now several folks in the community, including a state senator, are also beginning to find fault with this University and its Athletic Department.
Most everyone is a Duck fan here in Eugene. The football games are a thrilling tradition and a spectacle no student should leave here without enjoying. But what people find fault with is that this same spectacle seems to be getting out of hand.
Recently, the University has received criticism from several state broadcasters and Sen. Rick Metsger, D-Welches, a former Portland sportscaster, over a proposed policy to limit their footage from Duck football games to 20 seconds, which they say is a violation of their right to free speech.
In and of itself, this could be seen as a somewhat minor issue, and one that likely will be resolved by kickoff Sept.1 when the Ducks take on the University of Wisconsin. But in the light of all the other complaints against the University administration because of athletics, it just is one more example of this institution’s bull-headed arrogance in regard to sports. One big bowl game win and a likely high spot in the national rankings, and this University starts to strut around like it’s the biggest dog on the block. There was the three-story billboard in downtown New York, a multi-million dollar stadium expansion, the games scheduled in the middle of the week before finals for television dollars, and now the University is trying to control local broadcasters to protect a contract with ESPN.
When and where will it end?
President Dave Frohnmayer has repeatedly said the issue is one of great importance to the University and that he is actively working to address it with other administrators around the country. One of those could be former University of Oregon President Myles Brand, who is now president of Indiana University and has become one of the more outspoken critics of the rampant commercialization of intercollegiate athletics.
Yet Frohnmayer’s words appear to ring hollow when one takes into account how the Athletic Department continues to draw fire from both the academic community and now the community in general. His most recent move was to announce that the University would begin to scale back the budget subsidy to the Athletic Department from the University’s general fund. But this move is meaningless if one takes into account that by the time the subsidy is at zero, the Athletic Department will be making far more revenue from its expanded Autzen Stadium.
How can this University continue to act in such a manner when big, bloated and powerful athletic departments are being criticized by professors, independent groups, former administrators and community members?
The answer is tougher to find than the problems. There is no doubt that demand for top-quality intercollegiate athletic programs will not decrease anytime in the future. This is especially true in a state such as Oregon where a lack of professional sports teams puts an even greater emphasis on the top two universities to field competitive athletics. Therefore, universities themselves cannot be solely responsible for this problem, as fans have created a need for huge stadiums and top teams funded by millions.
But the fans were always there when both the University of Oregon and Oregon State University sports teams were the laughingstock of the Pac-10 and unknowns in the nation. We will love our Ducks and Beavers regardless of where they stand in the nation.
When one takes into account that the demand for athletics will remain constant, the argument can be made that universities themselves must be responsible for stopping their shameless self-promotion. The University has earned the national reputation and attention it has longed for; now is the time when it can show some restraint and end the manic pursuit of an even bigger stadium or more millions in broadcast deals and merchandising.
It’s common knowledge that this is just part of the business of higher education. But has it really gotten so bad that we can only resign ourselves to this? Can’t we expect our University to adhere to a better standard and not sell its academic mission short just for the sake of prestige on an athletic field?
Let’s hope so.