Rutgers prof in hot water over racist statements

Sorry, couldn't find a link. Posting story instead.

Rutgers prof takes heat over comments about student athletes
By CHRIS NEWMARKER
Associated Press Writer
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — A longtime critic of Rutgers University's drive into big-time sports is being criticized over a newspaper article comment that university officials have branded as racist.
At the end of a New York Times article Wednesday about William C. Dowling's failed efforts to get Rutgers to turn away from high-stakes athletics, the tenured English professor responded to arguments that athletic scholarships provide opportunity to low-income, minority students.
``If you were giving the scholarship to an intellectually brilliant kid who happens to play a sport, that's fine,'' Dowling said. ``But they give it to a functional illiterate who can't read a cereal box, and then make him spend 50 hours a week on physical skills. That's not opportunity. If you want to give financial help to minorities, go find the ones who are at the library after school.''
Rutgers Athletic Director Bob Mulcahy told local newspapers that Dowling's comment was ``a blatantly racist statement.''
In a statement released by the university, Rutgers President Richard McCormick called it ``inaccurate and inhumane.''
``It also has a racist implication that has no place whatsoever in our civil discourse,'' McCormick said in the statement.
A Rutgers spokesman said Thursday he did not know if Dowling would face any sanctions.
Contacted Thursday, Dowling defended his statement, saying that Mulcahy and McCormick had taken it out of context, that he was directly answering a question related to minorities.
``If someone has a way to answer that question without mentioning race, I would like to hear it,'' said Dowling, who called the officials' accusation of racism the ``cheapest rhetorical ploy I've ever heard.''
Dowling, who said he was arrested in the South during the 1960s for work in the civil rights movement, said McCormick was racist for running an athletics program that exploited minorities.
``None of these kids would have been able to get into Rutgers if they hadn't been able to throw something or kick something or slam dunk something,'' Dowling said.
Rutgers' aspirations to elite status in college athletics, most notably in football, have provoked considerable controversy over the years in the university community, with some arguing that the university should spend less and compete at a lower level. And last year, the university axed six of its smaller intercollegiate sports teams amid state budget cuts, even as more money was poured into the football program.
The investment in football has paid off in unaccustomed success for the team, a sold-out stadium and major increases in sales of licensed merchandise. Last year's team went 11-2, won a bowl game and finished No. 12 in the final AP poll. This year's team is 3-0 and ranked No. 10 in the country.
Rutgers athletic officials say the football team's 2.7 grade-point average is on par with the university as a whole.
An NCAA academic progress report for the 2003-04 to 2005-06 school years listed the Rutgers football team's academic progress as being in the 80th to 90th percentile for Division I football programs.

 

I'd be interested in what leaders from African-American communities would have to say on this subject. It'd be nice to hear from a variety of leaders, not just Sharpton and Jackson. The prof's comments were pretty ugly toward the student-athletes for whom he claims to have compassion, but it'd be a shame to ignore the legitimate objection to the culture of major college sports, particlarly at universities that are pushing to raise their level of competitiveness in a hurry. BTW, I'm not offering comment on this particular situation since I know nothing about what goes on at Rutgers.

 

Someone had dinner with Bill-O...

 

MF'er probably's just ticked off because they keep asking for iced tea.

 

Only in Piscataway ...

 

Obviously no one will deal with the issues, only get very defensive, which means smearing the person with an opinion as a racist.

 

SI did a feature on this guy a couple years ago, if memory serves. He was and is violently opposed to the idea that Rutgers and other schools give athletes scholarships. I believe that he scoffed at the idea that D-1 sports brings the school notoriety and money.

 

Pretty racist attitude. I'm surprised they haven't revoked his tenure.

 

AP probably should have quoted the preceding 'graf from the NYT piece:

Dr. Dowling grew convinced that the shift was degrading the caliber of students, indeed the entire communal culture. A self-proclaimed “academic traditionalist” who doesn’t drive and still thinks Bob Dylan betrayed folk music by going electric, he became the hub of RU1000. And while he enjoyed teaching many members of the track, swimming and crew teams in his courses, he vociferously resisted the notion that athletic scholarships offered opportunity to low-income, minority students.

``If you were giving the scholarship to an intellectually brilliant kid who happens to play a sport, that's fine,'' Dowling said. ``But they give it to a functional illiterate who can't read a cereal box, and then make him spend 50 hours a week on physical skills. That's not opportunity. If you want to give financial help to minorities, go find the ones who are at the library after school.''

Makes more sense when you present it as it was originally presented.

 

Reminds me of a lit prof. I had in college who claimed the school's football and basketball programs hadn't graduated a single player. I guess the basketball player who sat in front of me at commencement didn't get that memo.

 

He probably didn't write his own papers, either.

 

Maybe not, D_K, did you go to Minnesota?