College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

Crew faces financial upstream battle

Pure Rubbish

By Brian Canares

Columnist

Print this article

Published: Monday, November 30, 2009

Updated: Monday, November 30, 2009

The Daily Targum ran a news article called “Clubs overdue for funding change.” It reported that many students are prevented from joining club sports teams because of expensive dues. As a result, the Rutgers University Student Assembly Allocations Board has considered the possibility of funding these organizations through student fees. In order to compensate for the rise in cost, however, student fees would ultimately be increased. While I think it is admirable that RUSA is finally doing something legitimate, it should not be its responsibility to fund these organizations. These clubs, especially the six Olympic sports that were axed in 2007, should be funded through alternative means, even if it has to come out of President Richard L. McCormick’s $550,000 salary. Maybe the Rutgers football team can give some of its generated revenue from its last two stellar 8-5 seasons. I was under the impression that the stadium expansion was necessary to solve our financial problems. In order to put this into perspective, it’s important to discuss the academic priorities of the University in relation to athletics.
While some football players are playing without any financial incentive, many are here under full scholarships. So, I decided to take my time to research how these students make use of this great opportunity. Through the University database, I was able to find the academic majors of 59 players, as 47 of them were listed as undecided. Of those 59 individuals, the majority were criminal justice majors, as 21 chose this to be the core of their studies. Twenty-eight players were more or less evenly distributed in labor studies, pre-business, communications, economics and history. There was one student majoring in exercise science, as this constituted the only science related major on the team. The rest were scattered amongst other liberal arts majors, such as political science, sociology, journalism and marketing.
With these statistics in mind, I found it appropriate to also research the academic majors of one of the cut Olympic sports teams. I thought the crew team would be best, as we dedicate every touchdown to the words “Up stream, red team.” In addition, crew was once the pride and soul of the University, before this institution completely disregarded the value of tradition — and we wonder why no one knows the alma mater. These students are rowing simply because they love the sport. Of the 15 members who declared majors, four were in the School of Engineering while one was in the Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy. These two programs require the utmost demand from its students, regardless of their extra-curricular activities. Furthermore, six others also majored in math or science related fields, such as microbiology, biotechnology, marine sciences and ecology. The rest took the liberal arts route, as they dedicated themselves to political science, history, pre-business, psychology and finance. Naturally, I gathered information from a much smaller pool of athletes, but it should not discount the fact that crew members take themselves very seriously inside and outside of the classroom.
Let it be clear. I am in no way discrediting the academic ability of the football team, as I am also a liberal arts major myself. But it is hard to make the argument that criminal justice research methods are more rigorous than organic chemistry. I support University football, and I am not saying it should not exist, but these club sports constitute a very small percentage of the entire football budget. If we are going to give full scholarships to the football players then the least we can do is provide sufficient funding for these organizations. Furthermore, we should even go as far as to re-instituting the six Olympic sports. These individuals have proven to be outstanding student-athletes, and they work just as hard, if not harder, than football players. It’s time the University started taking notice. As seen by their dedication, members of these clubs, especially the crew team, also probably have the most University pride. In the long term, they are the ones who will actually respond to the incessant phone calls and letters about donations. On the other hand, if the University does not ensure their happiness, it will never see a cent of the relatively high paying salaries of these future doctors, pharmacists and engineers. Our focus should be on improving student life now so future alumni leave with a very good impression. As I see it, our pathetic $500 million endowment cannot get any worse, but I’ve been wrong many times before.
It is imperative that the University gets its priorities straight with athletics and academics. The financial statuses of these clubs are in limbo, in which adequate funding for the six former varsity sports will be gone in 2010 and 2011. With exception of three hour labs, these students will have nothing else to look forward to. I guess we can look on the bright side. They can see the University face-off in December against some Conference USA team in the worthless St. Petersburg Bowl. At that point, maybe we can use all $1 million dollars earned from our bowl win to help pay for these club sports. Problem solved.

Brian Canares is a Rutgers College senior majoring history and political science. His column, “Pure Rubbish,” runs on alternate Tuesdays. He welcomes feedback at bcanares@eden.rutgers.edu. 

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

14 comments

DB
Thu Dec 10 2009 16:44
JimmyRU, I DOUBLE DOG DARE you to find a single place that I (or anyone else) wrote here that says that person hates football. I have never said one single negative thing about any football player! You are trying to justify the actions of an organization by saying we make fun of its members, which would be illogical even if it WERE true, which it isn't.
JimmyRU
Sun Dec 6 2009 16:48
I have to say one last thing before I sign off on this subject.

If you can't figure out why the supporters of football at RU get upset with the people who are rallying for crew to get reinstated, I'll tell you why:

It's about how you're presenting your case. You make it into an elitist "crew athletes are smart and football players are functional illiterates who can't read the side of a cereal box" (you know where this comment came from). When you make your argument a nasty, us against them issue, it's bound to turn ugly. THIS is why we are defending football at Rutgers. I brought up the block "R" banners around campus as a signal to Coach Schiano's branding of the University. What's the response I get? Their cheap plastic banners put up by an overpaid coach. This is example A of what's wrong with all you "anti's".

JimmyRU
Sun Dec 6 2009 15:20
Rutgers is no different from any other major state university when it comes to DI athletics. You football "haters" are trying to make the case that we should go back to the past and play teams like Colgate and Columbia again. Rutgers isn't a small, private-type school anymore. We're a large, well respected state university, and we should ACT LIKE ONE in academics AND athletics. Why you guys cannot or WILL not accept this is beyond comprehension.

You don't like football? Then don't watch it! But don't shove your anti agenda down everyone else's throats!

DB
Sun Dec 6 2009 10:39
JimmyRU, how DARE you come on here and telling us that our opinion "sucks!" If you think some crazy professor thinks they're God's gift to humanity, just look over at the man with the big corner office in Hale Center who feels that football deserves a blank check every year because of a bunch of people wearing pullovers and hanging cheap plastic "R"s in their dorm windows. Dowling doesn't make $2 million a year or have a private helicopter service. The English department never tried to put a $100 million expansion in their building. So who exactly is who's gift to humanity? Certainly not you nor me nor anyone else.

You seem to be saying, "Well we got a bunch of people attending football games, therefore it's automatically better than anything else here" If that's not chutzpah I don't know what is. Members of crew, or fencing, or diving, are JUST as much athletes as the football players They put just as much time in and have just as good academic records (probably higher). AND CREW GENERATES JUST AS MUCH PRIDE AS FOOTBALL, so don't come on here acting just as high and mighty as you accuse Rutgers 1000 as being! "Look, we're more important than you because we have a high profile coach and cheap plastic "R" symbols all over campus." That is pathetic.

RC Alum
Sun Dec 6 2009 07:56
It's unfortunate that academics was brought into the discussion as the real core of the issue is that there should always be room and funding for RU Men's Crew to enjoy varsity status. Everyone understands the publicity and revenue that a football program affords the school, but at the same time is there truly no room anymore for men's crew at the varsity level? Men's Crew is the oldest sport at Rutgers and with it the oldest tradition. More Rutgers' Olympians have been produced by RU Crew than any other sport. Crew members practice arduously year round to represent the university. In todays club environment they do so without benefit of any scholarships or the recruitment draw that a varsity scholarship program use to afford them. The team is no longer invited to the national IRA championships because of the club status that was imposed on them. The team still competes and attempts to defend RU's honor against all of their traditional varsity foes including the Ivy League, Wisconsin, Navy and others. Unfortunately without the lure of varsity scholarships and status, recruitment of sufficient quality and quantity rowers is an overwhelming challenge. The RU heavyweight boat is fortunate to seat one or two out of eight true heavyweights as they face traditional challenges from opposing boats with eight solid heavyweight rowers. Imagine the results if the football team played their games with all walk-ons and half their linemen weighing in at 175 pounds. If there's dedication to be found anywhere at Rutgers it's at the boathouse and on the Raritan. Despite all the odds these young men press on through adversity to keep the oldest tradition alive in hopes that one day their successors can once again be afforded the benefits of varsity status. Men's crew needs to be reinstated to the same varsity status that that much younger cross country, golf, women's crew, and other sports enjoy. Take a break from ESPN, stadium lights and NFL press conferences (where was Ray Rice his senior year?). Spend an early morning walking Old Queens and then meander over to the Raritan to observe the oldest and purest Rutgers' sport tradition. That is at the heart of RU and shame on us all if it cannot be restored to its rightful place.
Mimi H
Sat Dec 5 2009 22:30
jimmyRU, relax. i was discrediting john's opinion about rowing not being a sport. so alllllllll the stuff you were saying about schiano is great, but it's not entirely true.
DB
Sat Dec 5 2009 11:05
All the "arguments" I see in these comments why Brian's editorial was wrong seem to center around "Football is better than crew because it's more popular." It's still a financial drain on the university, its filled with fake students with fake majors, which gives some doubt to these high academic progress ratings. Some of you may be offended by me talking about "fake majors," but you're the same people calling rowing a "fake sport," so I guess we're even. I don't give a rat's behind how many cheesy plastic "R"s adorn the dorm windows, or how Greg Schiano is the second coming of Jesus Christ. You're completely missing the point. The bottom line is that the six cut sports have low budgets and high-acheiving students, and if football can be funded, why can't they? "but it doesn't offer the same advantages to Rutgers that football does." In what way is rowing "less of a sport"? It produces the same character and pride that the football team does. The fact that you can't see a boat race at 12 PM on ESPN doesn't make it ANY less important!
JimmyRU
Thu Dec 3 2009 19:25
Mimi,

Your opinion sucks. When rowing can draw and average of ~50k people each week to their races, then you'll have a legit beef. But, I don't think that's happening, so maybe you should rethink making negative comments towards the football team, the same team that draws those 50k people a week with the same coach that implemented a strategy that has created a real sense of pride at Rutgers. Those "R" banners that are all over campus? The thousands of students wearing Rutgers t-shirts, sweatshirts, pullover jackets, etc.? The block "R" on so many of the buildings, academic and otherwise? Before Greg Schiano became head coach, there was none of this. Zero. Nada. You can thank Coach for making RU a brand name. He's the one who's done the work, not McCormick, not some crazy English professor (Dowling) who thinks he's God's gift to humanity and actually hates his employer which he openly mocks and gets away with it, and certainly not any student.

Mimi, your opinion is your opinion, but again, it sucks.

Just sayin'.

Mimi H
Thu Dec 3 2009 15:09
Such a shame. Rutgers has a long history for rowing. It most definitely is a sport, and a legacy considering it being in the "fight song." Most people on campus don't even know of the crew team which is such a shame, no thanks to the constantly-unranked football team. John, your opinion sucks. Just saying.
John
Wed Dec 2 2009 16:21
Rowing is not even a sport....its an activity the vikings used to get to the new world and since the discovery of wind power is no longer needed...i would rather burn my money than waste it on people in boats for no particular reason.
Pistak E.R
Wed Dec 2 2009 10:17
Unless your intention is to argue that a criminal justice major has no merit, I'm not clear on why you considered citing the discrepancy between the choice of those majors as indicative of a lower work ethic or reduced academic ability. Furthermore, I'm not clear why the predisposition towards criminal justice majors of the football team changes the fact that the team is significantly more important to the school, whether through the many thousands of fans that come out to watch the games or the significant revenue generated through ticket sales, than the six sports of which you speaks of. The fact that rowing tends to have engineer majors changes none of the circumstances that led to changes in funding.

I'd be interested to see how many alumni that no longer came back year after year for football games would be willing to donate grants, compared to the 15 rowing students considered here. Rowing is a great sport and certainly a worthy endeavor, but it doesn't offer the same advantages to Rutgers that football does.

JimmyRU
Wed Dec 2 2009 07:54
Roberto,

I would like a spread sheet of data to support your claims that "rowing alums will without a doubt be more successful than football players". I want to see what your baseline cohort is, what your definition of "successful" is, and how you would graph all this data from crew members and football players not only at Rutgers, but at other state universities. I'll wait for your reply.

In the meantime, I'll assume that you actually have no basis for your discriminatory comments other than the fact that you dislike football and probably don't accept the fact that the majority of the team is African-American. Again, I await your response.

Spencer G.
Tue Dec 1 2009 22:14
Exceptional article, I am not a student or alumni at Rutgers, but this article speaks about a problem which is widespread around the country. I understand that revenue generating sports are obviously going to be well funded, but this funding should not come at the expense of sports like rowing. Sports like rowing exemplify the ideals of amateur sports much more so than the Big-Business collegiate sports like football and basketball. These less visible sports don't have 85 scholarships, rather the athletes compete because they enjoy the sport, a novel idea in today's society were collegiate football and basketball is for many just a necessary step before going pro.
Roberto Fantastico
Tue Dec 1 2009 10:36
Good article. There is no reason the University can't support both football and rowing. The administration has no vision, and clearly doesn't appreciate the rich history that Rutgers should be celebrating.

You are correct, that the rowing alums will without a doubt be more successful than the football players. To say so is politically incorrect, but it is refreshing to see an undergrad journalist who deals in reality.

Well done.







log out