Canzano faced with Dilemma?

What, I wonder, will Canzano write about after learning of Kilkenny's donation to the University of Oregon ACADEMICS programs? My guess is that he will accuse Kilkenny of making a self-serving donation to as a simplistic gesture to answer academicians who continually criticize the amount of money donated to athletics while academic giving lags.

Personally, I have ALWAYS disagreed with this theory. But let me first address what I believe will be the back handed attempt by the Bald Faced Moron to, once again, take a personal shot at the University of Oregon. Pat Kilkenny is a businessman first, who has a great love for his alma mater. Pat Kilkenny recognizes the importance of academics at any university. After all, where would ANY of us be without education?

More importantly, Pat recognizes the important role that athletics can play on increasing academic giving. Yes, people will give money for athletics. But think about the mind set of those people who willingly donate money to ANY charitable organization... if a man has already opened his mind to the importance of his contributions to the continuing success of a university's athletics teams, will he not be more open to the concept of similar donations to help the academics programs? I say yes.

It is much more difficult for academic donor seekers to cold-call someone who has never donated a dime to his alma mater than to call the football fan who already gives some form of donation. Athletics donations open the door. More importantly, from Pat Kilkenny's perspective, he is a leader. He is leading Duck fans with actions right now, PROVING he understands the importance of academics.

There does not have to be a battle of the wills between the academics and athletics departments at any university. The goals of the two are NOT mutually exclusive. Oregon is a leader in pro-actively separating it's funding stream from general funds. It is an important step in the evolution of college athletics that the athletics department NOT draw from the general fund. When a university is able to divest itself from supporting it's athletics with general fund money, they inherently have more money for academics.

Furthermore, regardless of what may be said, athletics can be a very rewarding experience for all involved. The values of team work, accountability, respect for authority, leadership, goal setting and learning how to overcome adversity are just as valuable as the lessons learned in a classroom. Without these very vital lessons, a young adult is incomplete as a person.

How is the young business graduate supposed to learn how to thrive in the workplace without these very important concepts? He or she cannot.

Does this excuse everything bad that may happen? Absolutely not. However, it is important to remember that the media only covers what sells. Nothing more, nothing less. Thereby, what is heard when the news plays? the BAD things that athletes do. While members of the media (like Canzano) criticize the actions of a few athletes and their transgressions, do they remember to remind us that said athlete is only one of 85 on scholarship? Does he mention that 99% of the players at said school remain trouble free?

No. Why? Because that does not serve their purpose. Let there be no mistake, local newscasts, local sports shows, even national sports shows have an objective... and honest journalism is not that objective. Advertising dollars ARE that objective.

So while hypocritical chumps like Canzano get on their moral high horse to preach about how "bad" athletes and athletics departments are... ask why he is writing such one-sided stories. Is it because he only cares about the truth and presenting it in a fair and objective manner? Or is it because he recognizes that his job is dependent on advertising dollars and he only prints what he thinks will keep the subscriptions flowing? I know what my answer is... you be your own judge.