UMGriz75
Well-known member
In the event that they read anything in Main Hall, a recent paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research would be a useful coffee break item:
"The Benefits of College Athletic Success: An Application of the Propensity Score Design with Instrumental Variables," Michael L. Anderson, NBER Working Paper No. 18196, June 2012
http://www.nber.org/papers/w18196" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Unfortunately, the entire paper is behind a paywall, but the penultimate conclusion is in the Abstract:
"We find that winning reduces acceptance rates and increases donations, applications, academic reputation, in-state enrollment, and incoming SAT scores."
Now, I know this isn't all sportsy and likely inappropriate for a fan forum, and is a boring outtake from econometrics, but it directly addresses points -- that "athletics detracts from the mission," that "athletics offers more negatives than positives" -- that guys like Engstrom likely carry around as an underlying justification for their bizarre presidential behaviors.
"The Benefits of College Athletic Success: An Application of the Propensity Score Design with Instrumental Variables," Michael L. Anderson, NBER Working Paper No. 18196, June 2012
http://www.nber.org/papers/w18196" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Unfortunately, the entire paper is behind a paywall, but the penultimate conclusion is in the Abstract:
"We find that winning reduces acceptance rates and increases donations, applications, academic reputation, in-state enrollment, and incoming SAT scores."
Now, I know this isn't all sportsy and likely inappropriate for a fan forum, and is a boring outtake from econometrics, but it directly addresses points -- that "athletics detracts from the mission," that "athletics offers more negatives than positives" -- that guys like Engstrom likely carry around as an underlying justification for their bizarre presidential behaviors.