Hello all,

It appears that the trickle of responses to my e-mail poll has slowed to
a halt, so I will report the results.  There were a total of 42
responses, which was not quite as many as I received regarding the Fifth
Street situation, but not too bad considering the controversial nature
of the topic.  Anyway, here are the numbers:

Drop football and add baseball:                  16     38%

Drop football and replace it with nothing:       16     38%
   (or, as one respondent put it, drop football
   and replace it with an increased emphasis on
   academics)

Keep football as is:                              4     10%

Change to a lower division (II or III) for
athletics:                                        4     10%
   (this was not one of the listed choices but
   found some followers anyway)

Other:                                            2      5%

(Total does not equal 100% due to rounding.)

Two things have become clear to me.  First of all, the overwhelming
majority of rank-and-file UTC employees see something wrong with the
current situation.  76% of respondents are ready to drop football
altogether and fully 86% don't believe we can continue to support
football at the division I-AA level.  I haven't polled the students (I
hope the Echo or the SGA will at some point, making it clear that if the
state pulls athletic funding that students will be looking at athletic
fees of several hundred dollars every semester to make up the shortfall)
but it is obvious that the faculty and staff think change is needed.

The other thing that has become clear is that football is perceived as
somewhat of a sacred cow at UTC.  It is said that Social Security is the
"third rail" of American politics ... touch it and you die.  Is
athletics in general, and football in particular, the third rail of
internal UTC politics?  More than one person has hinted that I am living
on the edge by daring to even raise this topic for discussion.  Several
survey respondents made a point of asking me not to reveal their names
for fear of some sort of reprisal (which request I am honoring).  One
person said point-blank, "I don't need my house egged."  One person sent
his or her reply via campus mail without a signature, and another person
(within the athletic department) spoke with me privately regarding
concerns but said that responding to the survey or making any sort of
public comment would result in trouble.  And if you follow RAVEN you
probably noticed the deafening silence in response to my survey post
until Mike Russell had the guts to bring it up yesterday.  There are
many people who think we have a problem with spending for athletics on
this campus, but very few who are daring enough to express an opinion
publicly.  I think that is very unfortunate, because now (with a new
athletic director in place and with the possibility of cuts in state
funding) is the perfect time for this topic to be debated out in the
open.  I hope my taking the time to raise the question and report the
results stimulates this debate, and I hope the University administration
(including our new athletic director) will consider the viewpoint of
faculty and staff as they make decisions regarding future academic and
athletic budgets.

Joe Dumas