Why did the ucla football team stay at an expensive hotel last night??

<br>

<br>

<p>Well, I guess that gets to the heart of the matter, namely what is the proper purpose and role of a university? Is it to teach and research academic subjects, or is it to be a farm system for pro sports teams and vehicles for boosting t-shirt sales? And I remind you that Drama, music, and the other fine arts are Liberal Arts and traditionally have been included as part of the academic mission of the campus. Or stated more briefly, colleges are SUPPOSED to spend money on the drama department.</p>

<p>Football is not one of the Liberal Arts. It’s a side show, an unnecessary side show. When colleges are flush with money, spending on side shows may be okay. When the money tightens up it may be time for the football coaches to smarten up and the football players to grow up and both start acting more responsibly.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>Good for Ohio State. They are fortunate to be among the 22 public schools in which athletics turns a net profit. Too bad about the other 198 schools that don’t.</p>

<p>Guess what- the purpose of a Private U is NOT to make a PROFIT, it is to educate the students and do research. And that costs money. Which is why the taxpayers of this country are usually willing to support that goal- THAT is the “profit” or ROI, that is made from supporting a Private U.</p>

<p>blah blah blah</p>

<p>^^ oh , that was a really insightful comment…
and yes , there are sooooooo many private U’s that are primarily supported by taxpayer money…</p>

<p>"When the money tightens up it may be time for the football coaches to smarten up and the football players to grow up and both start acting more responsibly. "
exactly the point of this thread.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Right, because the incessant taxpayer rhetoric is remotely relevant to the situation.</p>

<p>Because your post isn’t at all a testament to total ignorance.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>How do you know? </p>

<p>Could you give us a breakdown of what the California taxpayers are actually paying to the UC system and what they should be looking to get in return?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Because her darling child goes to U$C. And the folks there know everything about UCLA. The moms on that forum are privy to all sorts of true information, like how UCLA’s cutting its writing program, or UCLA students rip pages out of library books, or how UCLA has classes with more than a thousand students in lectures.</p>

<p>Because if you’re a U$C mom it makes complete sense to rip UCLA for some random **** that every big time program does.</p>

<p>I don’t know whether the calculation in this char is totally correct. But it looks like UCLA made some money here:</p>

<p>[College</a> football expenses and revenue | Matlab Geeks](<a href=“http://matlabgeeks.com/sports-analysis/college-football/ncaa-div-i-college-football-expenses-and-revenue/]College”>http://matlabgeeks.com/sports-analysis/college-football/ncaa-div-i-college-football-expenses-and-revenue/)</p>

<p>As I said before this has nothing to do with USC[ where my son did go and for which we paid no tuition. So I have no Dog in that fight]</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-los-angeles/1248305-why-did-football-team-stay-expensive-hotel-last-night.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-los-angeles/1248305-why-did-football-team-stay-expensive-hotel-last-night.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>This duplicate thread on the UCLA forum confused me last night. I thought someone deleted my posts on that thread and I was really mad.</p>

<p>I guess CC does not allow spam.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t care about USC, but could you answer my question? I’d love to understand what the taxpayer’s expectations for the UC system should be overall.</p>

<p>Division 1 football programs turn allot of profit for their schools. Allowing the continuance of traditional, yet unprofitable programs. E.g., liberal arts. </p>

<p>You may not like it, (and neither do I), but here’s a truth: **Higher education is a business. **</p>

<p>This is beginning to sound like a Real Housewives of cc episode.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yikes, how many times do we have to 'essplain this to Lucy? The money the football team is spending is NOT the college’s money; it is raised privately. The college is NOT spending the money on a side show; indeed, spending money on such side shows is against UC policy. (Of course, the college has NO money to spend on a side show anyway.)</p>

<p>If you don’t like the d1 ‘side shows’, fine, start a thread about it. But this thread is about a complaint of a public football team staying in a hotel the night before a game. A hotel stay paid for with television revenue and ticket sales.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>So tell me again why you are so upset that they are spending money on the education of their students? Football players are students still…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Unless you go to a liberal arts school, who is to say that is a priority? Football is involved in education; those sports-haters just won’t admit that.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No kidding YDS, but it is CC, and isn’t this the norm for most threads? :rolleyes:</p>

<p>Most college students spent Friday and Saturday night in the comforts of home with family and friends due to it being Thanksgiving break. These students gave up their time with family and earned $ for the school. Hotel rooms seem reasonable, especially compared to staying in half-empty dorms.</p>

<p>Oh dear. When rational arguments can’t be found, it must be time to attack the posters! And what could be worse than to be a “mom” around here? It’s a dirty word, isn’t it? What do these moms do, after all, that could legitimize their right to an opinion on cc? Do they pay taxes to their states which fund public universities? Do they pay tuition to their kids’ schools? Yep. But if a kid around here doesn’t like their posts, it’s time to attack.</p>

<p>Students who receive taxpayer-funded/subsidized financial aid better not stay in any hotels, or I want the equivalent in my taxpayer money back!</p>