Pac 12 protest targets for-profit Grand Canyon's move to Division 1
- Thread starter FArting
- Start date
I see nothing wrong with this move and don't really understand why the PAC is making noise about it, especially since GCU is in an inferior conference. Profit or not-for-profit, either model strives to drive up revenue for their respective schools.
According to the article, the uproar started with ASU. Perhaps they're not thrilled with the competition for students and basketball recruits?
According to the article, the uproar started with ASU. Perhaps they're not thrilled with the competition for students and basketball recruits?
Last edited:
MigratingOsprey
Thank You Paul!
Wait, the NCAA and D1 are not for profit and tax-exempt?
And poor ASU is concerned about GC getting to tourney more.
And poor ASU is concerned about GC getting to tourney more.
The broader concern is ASU is in a match to the death with GCU. GCU's materials often compare their cost of tuition to ASU's. ASU, in the past 6 months, has been waging war behind the scenes.
All I can say is GCU is very, very shady. More to come in the next few months. This is merely the first public volley in what's going to become an in-town university war.
BigRedRage
Reckless
On Wolfs show they talked about how UofA did this to ASU many many moons ago and ASU threw a fit. Not ASU is doing it to GCU.
They also made a good point that all sports teams are for profit revenue generators for the school, just because GCU is for profit education shouldnt disbar them from having sports teams
I know the degree mill stuff and the other scandals tied to for profit universities but I have no problem with them having sports teams. What would it hurt?
They also made a good point that all sports teams are for profit revenue generators for the school, just because GCU is for profit education shouldnt disbar them from having sports teams
I know the degree mill stuff and the other scandals tied to for profit universities but I have no problem with them having sports teams. What would it hurt?
As an ASU alum, I would say ASU probably qualifies as "just as shady."
I know it sounds petty, but GCU pays their instructors about $11 an hour on average. It's primarily an online university, and it rakes in money for students that they've encouraged (high-pressure sales tactics and deceptive "counseling") to go into debt (federal loans) that don't finish two years even.
In spite of the picture their marketing department has painted, this is not a traditional university experience, and their primary agenda is not to educate the people of Arizona. Their agenda is to enrich their stockholders. It's a scam disguised as higher education. Dept. of Education concluded:
If you want that kind of team joining your athletic conference, raise your hand.
In spite of the picture their marketing department has painted, this is not a traditional university experience, and their primary agenda is not to educate the people of Arizona. Their agenda is to enrich their stockholders. It's a scam disguised as higher education. Dept. of Education concluded:
If you want that kind of team joining your athletic conference, raise your hand.
Last edited:
How much does ASU pay adjunct professors?
On Wolfs show they talked about how UofA did this to ASU many many moons ago and ASU threw a fit. Not ASU is doing it to GCU.
They also made a good point that all sports teams are for profit revenue generators for the school, just because GCU is for profit education shouldnt disbar them from having sports teams
I know the degree mill stuff and the other scandals tied to for profit universities but I have no problem with them having sports teams. What would it hurt?
Not even close to the same thing. GCU does not have the same high-minded educational agenda as non-profit schools. Their college model is harmful to any community that helps foster it.
Greater Phoenix is in dire need of more small liberals arts schools and more 4-year alternatives, but GCU is not it. GCU used to be a fine small college option. My father got his Bachelors of Science from there 40 years ago. It is not that same school he went. It is the University of Phoenix. Same model type. Even some of the same people.
What would it hurt? Think of your most cynical thought about college athletic sports and apply it to the whole university. That's what GCU is.
About $3 to $4 more dollars an hour for newbies.
:free market:
Yikes. Good job, sparky.
The NCAA is a revenue-generating entity. NFP universities are revenue-generating entities. This encroaches on hypocrisy for the PAC-12 (mainly ASU, which boasts a total enrollment figure of ~75k). For-profit universities have a bad reputation, and some for good reason. But so do many NFP colleges. ASU, tOSU, some SEC colleges, the entire Cal State system, and others have been called out publicly for their less than stellar academic reputations. What's important is if your program is accredited, and some for-profits are.
ASU's reputation has been gradually increasing and a degree from the school has credible merit in the real world. In fact, they were recently named one of the top 100 universities in the world. It is a patent-filing R-1 facility with numerous acclaimed colleges. Its law schools and business schools are considered among the best values in public education in the U.S.
GCU is accredited. They're also still on probation with the Dept. of Education for fraud. If you ever get a chance, ask one of the "pre-med" graduates how many med schools accepted them.
Sure. They belong together.
Every educational facility is a "revenue generator." That's hardly the issue. ASU ultimately answers to the Board of Regents and the taxpayers. They have to maintain an honest agenda, and their agenda has been a solid commitment to being a commuter school because of the dearth of 4-year opportunities in the Valley.
GCU isn't a "revenue generator." It's a "profit generator." They answer to their stockholders and only their stockholders. They don't answer to the students, the faculty or their community. They have no obligation to anyone other than to maintain the pretense of raising the economic status of their customers, i.e. their students, as long as the students are able to secure loans.
If this were ITT, DeVry, AIT or University of Phoenix -- the exact same educational models -- we'd all find this laughable. But because this is GCU, a once-non-profit university that had a warm place in the community, we tend to be either naive of what it's become or delusional that it's somehow different than the other sophistry scam schools.
It's unfortunate that it's Dr. Crow that has to point it out, because he has an obvious ulterior motive to protest. But the protest is legitimate, reasonable, and necessary, because GCU has become a blight on the educational landscape. They do not belong in NCAA athletics at all, much less D-1. To accept them is to embrace all the criticism it tries so hard from which to defend itself.
Last edited:
Lefty
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2002
- Posts
- 12,660
- Reaction score
- 1,100
Bob Young gives his opinion.
http://www.azcentral.com/sports/hea...profit-grand-canyon-university.html#protected
By Bob Young, columnist azcentral sports Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:06 PM
It sure seems ironic that the Pac-12 Conference and Arizona State President Michael Crow are targeting Grand Canyon University’s move to NCAA Division I status.
The Antelopes already have been accepted and are set to begin play in basketball next season in the Western Athletic Conference. They would remain on probationary status for four years before being eligible for the NCAA Tournament.
Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott voiced concern about the move in a letter to the NCAA. The argument is that the NCAA would open a Pandora’s box by allowing a for-profit university to compete at the NCAA’s highest level against not-for-profit universities.
Because, you know, then it’s about answering to investors rather than students.
Oh, brother.
Trouble is, the argument is fraught with hypocrisy. Eventually, ASU and virtually all public and private universities are headed toward the same model.
With cash-strapped state governments unable to spend any more to keep up with rising costs of education, tuition costs at our state schools have skyrocketed. Students are graduating under a mountain of student-loan debt.
So where are universities looking for revenue to compensate?
To on-line courses.
Heck, even Johnny Manziel, Texas A&M’s Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback, revealed recently that he has been taking four on-line courses in sports management at A&M and virtually — so to speak — stays away from campus most of the time.
The world is changing, and the not-for-profit schools can see the same value in offering on-line courses that the for-profits do. The future of higher education is a hybrid, in which some students live and study on campus and others get their education through the same institution on-line.
If a public university can build and maintain infrastructure for a physical campus with monies from on-line offerings, and make those classes available for less cost, who is the winner?
All of us.
Besides, we all know major-college athletics are big, big business. Will investors complain if Grand Canyon basketball coach Dan Majerle doesn’t win enough games? Maybe.
Do boosters complain if Sun Devils coach Herb Sendek doesn’t win enough games? Absolutely.
This is simply a power play that isn’t going go over well. Goliath picking on David again.
And there’s no reason Arizona State and Grand Canyon can’t co-exist in a market this size. But not only has Crow reportedly told ASU’s teams not to schedule Grand Canyon, he has urged other Pac-12 schools to follow suit.
We were told not long before this tiff became public that Canyon officials even hoped to convince the NCAA to shorten the probationary period from four years to two, which obviously would benefit the school but also the struggling WAC.
The Pac-12’s complaint is likely to put an end to a faster timetable.
And all of this could set up a clash of Valley titans between Crow and Jerry Colangelo, who is serving as a consultant to Grand Canyon president and CEO Brian Mueller. It was Colangelo, Chairman of USA Basketball, who helped smooth the way for GCU’s entry to Division I, thanks to his strong relationship with NCAA President Mark Emmert.
Because of that relationship, Colangelo is treading lightly for now.
“I’ll just say that I’m disappointed to hear that the commissioner of the Pac-12 or any of the schools within the conference would take the position that has obviously been expressed,” Colangelo said. “It seems a little short-sighted, especially when so many schools in the community are developing other sources of revenue to supplement state aid.
“From the standpoint of our own state and community, I have always supported Arizona State. When I owned the Suns, we were a major supporter. It was the right thing to do for the community. I think it would be wonderful to see ASU continue to schedule Grand Canyon in all the sports that they have in the past and get beyond this because our state and locals schools should compete the right way against each other.”
Reach The Heat Index at 602-444-8271 or [email protected]. Follow us on Twitter @BobYoungTHI.
http://www.azcentral.com/sports/hea...profit-grand-canyon-university.html#protected
By Bob Young, columnist azcentral sports Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:06 PM
It sure seems ironic that the Pac-12 Conference and Arizona State President Michael Crow are targeting Grand Canyon University’s move to NCAA Division I status.
The Antelopes already have been accepted and are set to begin play in basketball next season in the Western Athletic Conference. They would remain on probationary status for four years before being eligible for the NCAA Tournament.
Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott voiced concern about the move in a letter to the NCAA. The argument is that the NCAA would open a Pandora’s box by allowing a for-profit university to compete at the NCAA’s highest level against not-for-profit universities.
Because, you know, then it’s about answering to investors rather than students.
Oh, brother.
Trouble is, the argument is fraught with hypocrisy. Eventually, ASU and virtually all public and private universities are headed toward the same model.
With cash-strapped state governments unable to spend any more to keep up with rising costs of education, tuition costs at our state schools have skyrocketed. Students are graduating under a mountain of student-loan debt.
So where are universities looking for revenue to compensate?
To on-line courses.
Heck, even Johnny Manziel, Texas A&M’s Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback, revealed recently that he has been taking four on-line courses in sports management at A&M and virtually — so to speak — stays away from campus most of the time.
The world is changing, and the not-for-profit schools can see the same value in offering on-line courses that the for-profits do. The future of higher education is a hybrid, in which some students live and study on campus and others get their education through the same institution on-line.
If a public university can build and maintain infrastructure for a physical campus with monies from on-line offerings, and make those classes available for less cost, who is the winner?
All of us.
Besides, we all know major-college athletics are big, big business. Will investors complain if Grand Canyon basketball coach Dan Majerle doesn’t win enough games? Maybe.
Do boosters complain if Sun Devils coach Herb Sendek doesn’t win enough games? Absolutely.
This is simply a power play that isn’t going go over well. Goliath picking on David again.
And there’s no reason Arizona State and Grand Canyon can’t co-exist in a market this size. But not only has Crow reportedly told ASU’s teams not to schedule Grand Canyon, he has urged other Pac-12 schools to follow suit.
We were told not long before this tiff became public that Canyon officials even hoped to convince the NCAA to shorten the probationary period from four years to two, which obviously would benefit the school but also the struggling WAC.
The Pac-12’s complaint is likely to put an end to a faster timetable.
And all of this could set up a clash of Valley titans between Crow and Jerry Colangelo, who is serving as a consultant to Grand Canyon president and CEO Brian Mueller. It was Colangelo, Chairman of USA Basketball, who helped smooth the way for GCU’s entry to Division I, thanks to his strong relationship with NCAA President Mark Emmert.
Because of that relationship, Colangelo is treading lightly for now.
“I’ll just say that I’m disappointed to hear that the commissioner of the Pac-12 or any of the schools within the conference would take the position that has obviously been expressed,” Colangelo said. “It seems a little short-sighted, especially when so many schools in the community are developing other sources of revenue to supplement state aid.
“From the standpoint of our own state and community, I have always supported Arizona State. When I owned the Suns, we were a major supporter. It was the right thing to do for the community. I think it would be wonderful to see ASU continue to schedule Grand Canyon in all the sports that they have in the past and get beyond this because our state and locals schools should compete the right way against each other.”
Reach The Heat Index at 602-444-8271 or [email protected]. Follow us on Twitter @BobYoungTHI.
Phrazbit
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Posts
- 22,635
- Reaction score
- 15,381
I understand all of ASU's listed concerns... however, the timing of their protest destroys all of their credibility.
Heard a commercial yesterday on NPR for ASU online courses.
Diamondback Jay
Psalms 23:1
I'm not questioning you here, but that's lunacy. They pay $50 grand per year to the Admissions Reps. Paying instructors $27 grand less than what they pay an admissions rep is insane.
I'm not shooting the messenger, and I take your word at this. I'm just baffled.
That sounds straight from ASU. I missed the outrage over GCU and University of Phoenix until ASU didn't want the Div I competition. I guess lots of the media spoke out when the taxpayer funded football stadium was named after such a horrible institution.
Phrazbit
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Posts
- 22,635
- Reaction score
- 15,381
