The topic is "The Economics of College and Pro Football". I can only imagine how narrow minded and biased it will be.
He's not against big time college football, unlike Dowling. I think his curriculum will be (unfairly) balanced between how it's done correctly (Michigan) and how it's done disastrously (Rutgers).
I don't think that's his premise, but it's close.He will not own up to the fact he is a faculty union activist and very few other AAU schools have a faculty union. Nor that RU profs are paid better than most AAU faculties on average. His resl premise is if we could only down grade football there would be plenty of money for faculty raises.
He's not against big time college football, unlike Dowling. I think his curriculum will be (unfairly) balanced between how it's done correctly (Michigan) and how it's done disastrously (Rutgers).
You've hit the nail on the head, in a way. Whenever people talk about Rutgers upping how much money they're spending, they always talk like we're planning to spend Ohio State/Michigan levels of money. That's absurd and not in the plans, but it makes for more clicks and more outraged readers.
"We want to win the Big 10."