In the Next 5 years

[California Cajun]

I chose athletics, because without an immediate stimulus package it can't stay 1-A. It was put on hold for decades until the academic endowment of over $100 million was raised. What athletics needs to do is get to the point of self-sufficiency.

[CajunSaint]

to give dr. authement the benefit of the doubt, he made the decision to bolster academics. after all, we had much ground to make up, after the raiding of various programs that took place in the 70's and 80's when we were getting "too big for our britches" and being "uppity." his was a philosophical decision. it was a tough one. personally, i would have liked to have seen more spent on athletics, but it was his decision to make. now, to the future. i really believe the new admin. will open up a little on the athletic spending. we have made strides in academics-the $100 million endowment. plus the efforts of gerald hebert and his team should produce more visible results. i am optimistic.

[ULvictory]

_ i would love if our athletic program were to grow in the next 5 years, BUT if you were to ask me which one of the two is more important for our university, it would have to be academics. Everyone always says how Dr. A spent so much money on improving academics, but I still don't think we are a top school in the state. I think strictly speaking on the part of academics (please don't jump on my back everybody for what I'm about to say...) LSU is much better than we are currently. Yes, we have a better Computer science program and nursing program, and a few others that are equal to or better, but overall, we have greater disparities between our best programs and our worst programs than our public counterpart in BR. They are just more consistently good across the board. We have pockets of excellence (computer science, nursing) and pockets of misery (College of Business). Thats just my 2 cents... _

[angellebertrand]

I believe Drumroll hit the nail on the coffin with "If athletics show improvement, enrollment will grow". If there would be a sudden wave of sucess within our sports, that would attract students to the university. I am spreaking as a student myself and always hear from kids they may not want to go here because they say (in football) "we suck". People want to belong to a winning team, its human nature. On the other hand, studious students could care less about athletics and would want to attend a great university because of what degree programs are offered. No matter what, I can't wait to graduate but will miss going to the games for free!

[Cajun Express]

_ _

Nobody jumping your case, they get a lot more money per student and have more money for everything. So yes we need to improve all aspects of our school. It can never be an either or situation.

UL by it's mission statement will never be allowed to become a school like North Carolina, or Virginia by the state, but we can if we grow ourselves outside of the funds the state is willing to give us. It will require you young graduates to contribute to the foundation for the future to be brighter for those who follow you. You will benefit by having a degree from a school that will be better than the one you graduated from.

Athletics vs academics in public universities really do not exist for the most part. If you follow the athletics you might be willing to support the academics even as a non graduate. On the other hand if you are simply in business or have a great job without that UL degree you probably won't contribute without some sort of athletic tie. If you are a academic guy you will give to academics regardless of what is happening in football.

So IMO each can grow without hurting the other, and the athletic tie in will help the academic in the long run. We are not Princeton, Harvard, or Yale and should not confuse what our mission is.

[awadelewis]

What LSU does is bring in a lot more of their own education money through research grants. Many of their departments depend on these grants. Their professors are granted tenure based on years of research and how much money they bring into the departments. UL is not nearly as much of a research based university like LSU. _

This is why the creation of a strong and focused foundation dedciated to supporting the athletic program is so important. The size of the state funding for LSU athletics isn't different from what is allocated to the other universities in the state. That's mandated by the annual budget we get from the Legislature. What LSU does have is the TAF which gets the funding for their athletic program from other sources. Those sources contribute funding to the athletic program that is as large or larger than what the state budgets for our ENTIRE institution.

Look at the academic programs here at UL that are perceived as being successful. As a computer science graduate student, I can definitely say that it's the outside funding sources (i.e., grants) that has allowed our faculty to build the program we have today. That's what pays for all of those "gee-whiz" toys you see in our new building (which was also paid for in a large part from sources beyond the annual state funding). That wouldn't have happened if we had been limited to just the money we get each year from the state budget.

I think the point that people should try to realize is why can't BOTH get better? You don't have to sacrifice education for athletics. The state doesn't tell us that you have this amount of money but you have to use if for one or the other.

The Legislature and the Board of Regents mandates both the size of our budget and where it can be spent. That said, you're right about the fact that you should not separate academics and athletics. A strong athletic program builds good PR for the University which in turn causes people to look at the other things that go on here on campus.