>Posted on 20 Apr 1995 at 13:54:18 by Mike Machnik
>
>Re: Salaries revisited
>
>Luiz Valente writes:
>>
>>"Research dollars" have absolutely nothing to do with a winning football
>>team, but with the quality of research projects, and the reputation
>>of the faculty member and the institution. With all due respect,
>>Boston College won't turn into a major research university simply because
>>it has a nationally-ranked football team.
>
>Directly, I agree it won't.  But a winning football team may lead to
>more donations to the university, which means more money available for
>certain academic programs, which could mean an upgrade in faculty and
>research capabilities and the ability to attract research contracts...if
>that's what the school wants.
 
Mike, I know what I'm talking about. Money for research comes from
the NSF, NASA, NEH, etc. It has NOTHING to do with the athletic
success. It is completely dependent on the quality of research
projects and the reputation of the individual and the institution.
 
I'm all for college athletics. I believe that it can be an integral
component of one's education, I think it helps build a sense of
community, and it may even attract a few extra dollars from alumni
(although this has never been proven conclusively), but it has
little effect on what happens in the world of research. Remember that
for every Michigan and Ohio State (major research universities with
strong athletic programs) there are many more institutions (which will
remain unnamed) with strong athletic programs but irrelevant research
accomplishments.
 
Luiz F. Valente