Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!cuccia From: cuccia@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU (Nick "Coosh" Cuccia) Newsgroups: net.college Subject: Re: Yes, I'm here. Pick a topic, any topic. Message-ID: <11274@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: Fri, 20-Dec-85 17:07:18 EST Article-I.D.: ucbvax.11274 Posted: Fri Dec 20 17:07:18 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 22-Dec-85 00:14:39 EST References: <1191@sdcsvax.UUCP> Reply-To: cuccia@ucbvax.UUCP (Nick "Coosh" Cuccia) Organization: Insanity Unlimited Lines: 60 Keywords: apathy In article <1191@sdcsvax.UUCP> rose@sdcsvax.UUCP (Dan Rose) writes: > > [2] How do people out there feel about the athletic >scholarships/recruiting/exceptions controversy? Some say that Two sides to this one. There are those that feel that good athletes, regardless of their academic background, are a benefit to the school that they go to. They help provide entertainment and, depending upon the team quality, revenues from alums, boosters, and television. I've always said that USC's football team is the best money can buy... 8-). On the other hand, Some schools subsidize this through easier admissions and scholarships, and turn a blind eye towards academic progress. I feel that the costs to the "student-athlete" are greater than the benefits to the university. Cal's football program was on NCAA probation in the late 60s or early 70s due to recruiting violations. Now the graduation rate of Cal's football players (approx. 62% of those who start here graduate) is higher than the national average for student in general. The view- point of the administration here is that if the student can't make the grade, then he should leave. That's also the view of the athletic director and the head football coach. That's also the way that it should be. I'd rather hear that my school leads the nation in Nobel laureates than hear that it leads the nation in collegiate football. > [3] There seems to be a big difference in atmosphere >between schools which have a large commuter population (say, less >than half the students live on campus) and those which don't. >My feeling is that there is more sense of community in the non- >commuter places, not just because everyone is around more, but >because the local area develops more campus-oriented places -- >both on-campus (student lounges, game rooms, libraries offering >more services or staying open longer, etc.) and off (pizza places, >movie theaters, bookstores open late, coffee places where they >don't hassle you to leave right away, local-talent clubs, etc.) >Anyone want to submit a responsible (or irresponsible) opposing >viewpoint? Fewer than twenty percent of Cal's students live on campus. Many, like myself, live in cooperative housing, most of the rest commute from as far away as San Francisco, Concord, Vallejo and San Jose. Berkeley, outside of the libraries, doesn't have much to on-campus after dinner, but the surrounding community has a great deal to do after dark. > Looking forward to some healthy debate . . . >-- > Dan (not Broadway Danny) Rose > rose@UCSD Pardon me if this is an old topic; haven't read netnews since October... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --Nick "Coosh" Cuccia --{...}!ucbvax!cuccia (USENET) --cuccia@ucb-arpa.arpa (Arpanet) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The University wouldn't dare say some of the things that I say... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^