WHEN YOU were a kid, how many times did your parents remind you that money doesn't grow on trees? The phrase is about as cliché as it gets, yet it remains as true today as it ever was. But I can tell you where money does grow. If you look closely, you can see it sprouting up all over the field at Scott Stadium, its filthy rich scent permeating the air in the stadium's luxury boxes as devoted alumni await the upcoming fall football season.
It was recently revealed that the Virginia Athletics Foundation, the fundraising branch of the University's athletic department, has almost reached its fundraising goal of $300 million. The VAF is currently at the 78 percent mark, $234.2 million rich and counting. Meanwhile, the fundraising branch of the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences is only 30.4 percent of the way to its goal of $500 million, $346 million short and $80.2 million behind VAF's total. So much for valuing the academic experience. Don't go looking for money growing in the library or even the academic buildings.
Every student at the University is familiar with the multitude of complaints lodged against the athletic department and against athletes in general. It goes something like this: The department spoils its athletes, and its athletes take advantage of this. Yet the story is much more complicated. Yes, some athletes make stupid decisions, and the athletic department does exercise a disgustingly large amount of power within the University. But what about the alumni who dish out thousands of dollars to support an athletic program that already dominates the academic divisions within the University?
According to an article in the Daily Progress by Brian McNeill, "Only UVa's Medical School Foundation has outpaced the athletic department in achieving progress toward its goal." McNeill adds, "Out of the total $302 million worth of philanthropic gifts to the university in 2007, a full $30 million went to the athletics foundation."
The VAF uses the money it raises through the Capital Campaign to fund such endeavors as facility maintenance and construction, athlete recruitment and other operational needs of specific sports. Though singing the "Good Ol' Song" at a football game or watching the women's basketball team make the NCAA playoffs this year is exciting and entertaining, neither activity embodies the definition of what a university should provide its students.
The homepage of the Office of the President's Web site states, "During the last decade, the University of Virginia has made tangible progress toward fulfilling its founder's intention of creating a 'bulwark of the human mind in this hemisphere.'" If donors really want to contribute to this mission, funding the basketball team won't get them very far.
It is time for both the University as well as its alumni to start valuing the academic experience at the University above the athletic one. New Cabell Hall's renovation in the coming years is a start toward improving academic facilities, but it pales in comparison to the construction of a brand new sports venue like the John Paul Jones Arena. Viewing athletics as a way to tap into alumni networks and encourage donations sends the message that athletics deserves primacy at the University because of its entertainment appeal.
While the academic achievement seems to draw less attention than a slam dunk or a hole in one these days, it is nevertheless the founding core of the University. It is why we are here. For alumni to overlook that fact, for the Athletic Department to be allowed to wield so much power over University operations, is a slap in the face to hard-working students who have to sit through class in a deteriorating building or who have to complete a chemistry lab with sub-par equipment.
Think about it this way. If the University were to lose its football program, which, incidentally, has not exactly been thriving as of late, would it lose key faculty members and highly motivated, hard-working students as a result? Probably not. But if academic buildings and programs were completely devoid of funding, would we lose those same people? Of course.
These are the questions that donors and administrators need to ask themselves as they look towards the future and the progress of the Capital Campaign. It is telling that two of the most visible spokespeople for the Campaign -- Tiki and Ronde Barber -- are high-profile athletes. And though it is difficult to abstain from utilizing the appeal of sports superstars, it is just as important to begin thinking about how to promote academics over athletics, about how to value grades over goals.
Amelia Meyer's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at ameyer@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
