 |
|
Point/Counter
Point
Is timing right to implement athletic plan? |
| Athletic plan to raise bar for varsity teams |
|
Where trustees concerned respect just a word |
Well, it happened.
The athletic proposal was passed and Appalachian
State University student fees will go directly toward the expansion
and improvement of Appalachian athletics as a whole. There are mixed
emotions about this occurrence, but, personally, I believe that
with the major face lift the rest of the school is receiving our
sports facilities need some improvements as well. |
Josh Dernosek
Sports Beat
|
David Forbes
SGA Beat |
oligarchy- n. A
form of government in which the power is controlled by a few persons
unaccountable to the majority.
The above word probably isn’t known to most
students who aren’t political science majors. Learn it, because
it’s obviously what we have at Appalachian State University. |
If Appalachian State
wants to stay competitive in our major sporting programs, updating
school facilities is a must—bottom line.
Our football team has been in NCAA Division I-AA contention for
a number of years. Women’s volleyball came off their best season
in recent history. Men’s basketball is doing something no other
team has done in school history. Track and field is just “off
the hook.” What other evidence do you need that our sports
teams deserve this and the students’ support?
Appalachian is going toward a new direction with all of the construction
going on, and the athletic teams need to follow for our school to
be something to visit in 10 years.
How many people reading this know exactly what is going on with
this campus in the wake of all this construction? I guarantee the
number of people that do is less than half, and that seems pretty
ignorant if you ask me. (But who did?)
First of all, the building that we all have come to love and adore,
Broome-Kirk Gymnasium, is not going to exist much longer. The building
will be torn down, and that land is going to be turned into a new
state-of-the-art cafeteria, something I am sure will be much better
than Welborn Hall (Welborn is to be torn down and Sanford Mall will
be expanded into that area, for those who are wondering).
Some might also know that Broome-Kirk does more than house intramural
sports and a swimming pool. If one were to wander upstairs they
would find offices, and anybody looking for Outdoor Programs would
find it in this building as well.
So now the university is faced with the predicament of where to
put these offices, intramurals, Outdoor Programs and the other facilities
that will be lost.
The new student recreation center, to be located where the tennis
courts behind Walker Hall are now, will house intramurals, outdoor
programs and a swimming pool. No athletic offices will be found
here, and the destruction of those tennis courts poses another problem.
Let’s move over to Kidd-Brewer Stadium, where a lot of attention
is going to be once all this renovation does begin. Seating capacity
is going to jump from 16,500 to 21,000, and sky boxes, game operations
areas and fan amenities are to be included as well.
Owens Field House, which currently consists of offices and facilities
for a number of athletics, will undergo major renovation as well.
The new field house will see new locker rooms, a new weight room
and new offices, to house those lost through Broome-Kirk’s
absence.
Appalachian soccer teams will not have to play on artificial turf
anymore, either, because a new natural-grass field is to be constructed
in the corner behind Kidd-Brewer and Red-Lackey Field (the baseball
field).
As for the tennis courts, those will be placed on Stadium Drive
as well, just past the parking area for the Quinn Center. Not only
will the men’s and women’s tennis teams play here, but
fans will be able to come and watch because stands will be provided.
What a concept.
That leaves Varsity Gymnasium and the change it is about to see.
Imagine the best indoor training facility you can think of. Now
picture that being Varsity Gym.
I know that it’s hard, so here is some help.
The new Varsity Gym will contain an artificial turf surface, as
well as a hard court area. It will also include an athletic training
facility and other practice spaces. We all know how cold Boone gets,
especially after the winter we are currently experiencing, so think
about how much our sports teams would benefit from being able to
practice inside. This new facility will allow for that.
It’s all overwhelming, I know, but the return the university
will receive is higher than the cost. Appalachian sports are a major
money-winner and bring a ton of exposure to our school, especially
the good teams. Alumni like to come watch games and hand over money
when they see results.
The George M. Holmes Convocation Center upped the bar for our athletic
facilities, and we see how our basketball teams have responded.
Let’s now see if our other programs can put these new facilities
to good use and give Appalachian State University national expo
sure at the same time. |
I felt sick to my stomach
Friday morning. First, the planned student protest against the athletic
proposal suffered an abysmal turnout. Then the Board of Trustees
passed the proposal with only Student Body President Ryan M. Eller
voting against it.
But the truly sickening moment came when Dr. Harry Nurkin made this
comment:
“Democracy is not defined by who wins, democracy is defined
by the freedom to speak with respect given to all parties involved.”
This is completely and utterly false. Democracy is defined as “government
in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by
them or their elected representatives.”
What about our elected representatives? Both student government
and faculty senate strongly voiced their opposition to the athletic
proposal. In the end, all the votes on the BOT, save one, were directly
against that voice.
Democracy is all about who wins. It is perfectly possible to have
a dictatorship where the leader listens to what everyone else has
to say and then does what he wants anyway.
Nurkin’s statement is also a perfect example of why the issue
of the athletic proposal has shown much of what is wrong at Appalachian—who
makes decisions and how they do it.
From the start, my problem has never been with the proposal itself.
I understand that athletic facilities need to be renovated and improved.
The problem is with how the decision was made and its extremely
bad timing.
The fashion in which the administration and board proceeded was
extremely dictatorial. The committee that decided on the plan in
the first place was formed by the Chancellor, with little or no
student input on the matter. When Dr. Gregory S. Blimling came before
SGA with the plan, he admitted that no effort would be made to seek
that input, other than telling SGA in effect: “we want to do
this.”
No architect was consulted about the plan and possible difficulties.
To the best of my knowledge, one has still not been consulted.
And then there’s the issue of the money.
Time after time, whenever I’ve talked to administrators about
the budget during the past year, they have always said how difficult
it was going to be to make ends meet, and how uncertain the financial
future and the economy were.
As a student, I have seen my tuition climb while class sizes have
increased. In the past weeks I have been searching for an apartment,
juggling facts and figures in my head to see how and what I can
afford.
In this economic decline, with everyone saying more budget cuts
are on the horizon, why do we need a $32 million improvement to
varsity athletics? Why do we need a Hall of Fame room or a lounge
in Owens Field House? No one has explained this to me in any satisfactory
manner.
Contrary to popular belief, athletics is not a huge money maker
at Appalachian. Athletic Director Roachel J. Laney admitted at one
of the SGA meetings on the plan that football here actually loses
money.
There has also been no explanation of why athletics is suddenly
more important than the other areas that aren’t getting an
increase next year because of this plan.
One of those areas that will be pressed for money is intramural
and club athletics. These athletics affect the majority of the students,
including myself, rather than the small percentage in varsity athletics.
To all appearances, the alumni and administration simply went about
implementing an athletic wish list with little thought to the consequences
or the opinions of the people most directly effected by it.
I didn’t come here for varsity athletics, I came here to get
a degree and become a more intelligent, well-rounded and adult person.
This is a university, an academic institution, its mission is to
educate, not to provide bigger, flashier amusement in the form of
its varsity athletic programs.
Some have said that students should support the administration and
athletics before we criticize. I do not agree. As long as it is
student money going to the university, it is our duty to criticize
and question how that money, our money, is being spent. This is
not the end, and as long as the BOT and the administration continue
to ignore the students’ voice in their decisions, all the pretty
words about respecting students will be just that, words and nothing
more. |
|
 |
 |
