Jump to content
  • Finish your profile right here  and directions for adding your Profile Picture (which appears when you post) is right here.

lownslowav8r

Members
  • Posts

    473
  • Joined

Posts posted by lownslowav8r

  1. I think it is a misunderstanding of what a university is to say that decisions about football teams and other aspects of the university need to be based completely on economics. Universities are expected to be more than a profit center and are expected to operate on a higher ethical level than a business. At some point, especially when football players become employees, it may be time to separate football teams from the university since the business of football may not be compatible with academics. The role of a university is constantly evolving and has become more of a business the last few decades. This has pluses and most definitely minuses.

    • Applause 1
    • Thumbs Up 1
  2. My take from the article is that the resistance to the deal was not due to the stereotypical  ‘business naivety" or "lack of innovation" of PAC-12 college presidents, but because of the opposition of USC to the deal. This opposition appears in retrospect to be based on USC not wanting to be contractually tied to the conference. As one person quoted said, "USC has had one foot out the door [of the conference] for the last 20 years."

    • Thumbs Up 1
  3. Charles asked me to summarize the article so I’ll give it a shot. The article looks at the strength of Oregons offense, defense, and special teams. It also discusses the impact of Dan Lanning, overall saying it’s positive since Lanning and Cristobal have the same "bring the best of the SEC to Oregon" approach.
     

    The article also discussed how the team, in certain areas did not perform up to its talent, summarized by the graph I attached. Overall the writer  says that if Oregon plays to its level of talent, Oregon should be competing for the PAC-?? championship (unlike last year).

×
×
  • Create New...
Top