Schlissel on athletics and academics (AD search related)

Submitted by dnak438 on

Some great reporting from the Michigan Daily on Schlissel's take on sports and the academic life of the University. It is certainly worth posting anyway, but especially because of this:

Schlissel added that Curzan [English Prof. Anne Curzan, who serves as faculty liaison to the Athletic Department and requests reports every semester on any classes with more than 20 percent student-athletes enrolled] said the Athletic Department “often tries to keep her at arm’s length,” expressing frustration regarding the marginalization of faculty governance in these matters.

“That’s why I’m taking a bit of time with the search for Dave’s successor,” Schlissel said. “Some folks wanted me to hire an athletic director (earlier) so he could fire the current football coach and hire the next coach but I want to take the time to make sure we get someone who is not only technically adept, but can ensure that the program has financial and academic integrity, and also someone who shares the value system of realizing our mission.

“People have been saying all kinds of things about who I’m talking to about positions and this sports stuff, and they name names of people who I have no idea who they are,” Schlissel said. “I’ve really learned that this whole athletic sphere and the usual way you approach things just doesn’t work. It’s just a crazed or irrational approach that the world and the media takes to athletics decisions.

“It’s a time sink,” he added.

Schlissel seems committed to maintaining the academic integrity of the sports teams. People will panic about what this means about Michigan's competitiveness going forward, but I think that many of us would be happy with a balanced approach. We don't want to replicate what happened at UNC, certainly.

Link: http://www.michigandaily.com/article/schlissel-talks-athletics-and-admi…

MGoBoard
Football
Michigan Daily
Mark Schlissel
ad search

Raskolnikov

November 11th, 2014 at 1:17 PM ^

It's a nice soundbite, but I don't think I buy it. Fifty students not graduating hardly makes any sort of a difference at all. If the performance of the football team seriously suffers, I'd bet that would do far more damage than an iffy football graduation rate would.

Joined: 06/03/2012

MGoPoints: 2237

TIMMMAAY

November 11th, 2014 at 9:37 PM ^

I was responding specifically to you saying you didn't buy Schlissel's' speech, or the points he was making. I'm saying that reading all of his comments to date, he's pretty serious about cleaning up the culture in the AD. If what he was saying about semi bogus classes for athletes, something needs to change there. I think that's important for the long term health of not just UofM athletics, but college athletics in general. 

He also seems to be very serious about doing everything he can to ensure that our football team is given everything it needs to perform at a high level. His quote about expecing top ten performance from both athletics, and academics seems to indicate that we're in petty good hands. He does seem to "get it". 

Joined: 09/08/2008

MGoPoints: 56285

Raskolnikov

November 11th, 2014 at 9:52 PM ^

Gotcha. Thank you for clarifying. I was addressing this quote from the poster I replied to:

"If you care about the university, and not just the football/basketball team, then this is absolutely a great news."

It all depends on what The Schliss does, but I stongly believe that dramatically raising our athletic admissions standards would harm the football team's performance to the point that it would have a much greater net negative impact on the university than a 60% football graduation does. As it is, the football graduation rate hardly seems to harm the university at all. Sure, it would be great to get that up, and I'm sure there are things we can do within the university to achieve that, but I absolutely hate the idea of jacking up the admissions standards. That would be a HUGE competitive disadvantage. A successful football program is a huge boon for the actual university side of the university.

Joined: 06/03/2012

MGoPoints: 2237

TIMMMAAY

November 11th, 2014 at 10:21 PM ^

I guess it all depends on how you define "student athlete". I don't think college football should function as a de facto minor league for the NFL. I think the student experience should be paramount, and the standards for athlete's shouldn't differ greatly from that of the general student body. 

edit: as an extension of that, I also think they should get paid (deferred until graduation). That's another topic though. It does highlight a conflict in my thinking though, that I haven't quite sorted out... 

Joined: 09/08/2008

MGoPoints: 56285

Reader71

November 11th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^

This isn't even about recruits, who have to go through the admissions office. This is about current student-athletes, who have to actually study to stay eligible. Our admissions standards have always been higher than most schools. Remember the part in Three and Out that talked about admissions fighting Coach Rod on his 8-10 borderline recruits, because they used to only let 4-5 such guys in? That was admissions. Schlissel is talking about academic reports for current players. He seems to be concerned with making sure our kids actually earn those grades. Which is great. And frankly, I dont think it is a problem for us. The kids get a lot of help, tutoring, mandatory study table, etc. But I don't believe anyone is cheating, doing homework for them, or having fake classes/grades. This might slow the process of finding a new AD, but it is absolutely worthwhile in my opinion. I'm really proud of Schlissel and the school. It also leads be to believe that Bates and NW's ADs are probably the leaders at this point. It also makes me think that Hoke's fate and the next coach will probably decided by Hackett.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

Reader71

November 11th, 2014 at 10:58 AM ^

I'm probably the wrong guy to ask, because like Hoke, I would walk to Ann Arbor to coach Michigan. I wouldn't care who my boss would be. More to the point, the coach will have a good idea of what kind of person the new boss will be, as outlined by Schlissel here. We want to win, but we want to do it the right way. Who the person is probably matters less than what they will expect. And, of course, there are no guarantees. Lloyd Carr worked under 3 ADs and two presidents. The coach is there to coach. His superiors will do what they will. He just has to do the best job he can and not, like Hoke said, worry about his job security. Do a good job, and you will be secure.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

Reader71

November 11th, 2014 at 1:22 PM ^

Not a myth. Even though the standards are only marginally higher, they are higher in one regard: Michigan admissions has fought with coaches on the number of borderline kids they will let in. That is, Bama might bring in a class of 25 players who are all right at the NCAA-mandated minimum requirements. Michigan, by the choice of its admissions department, will only allow the coach to bring in so many of those cases. It's in Three and Out. And it's the reason we shied away from the RB who was committed to Minnesota last season. I'm not saying we're Harvard. I'm not even saying we're much more stringent than Ohio. I'm just saying that we are.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

WolvinLA2

November 11th, 2014 at 5:27 PM ^

False.  You can never have two #1 priorities because sometimes your priorities goes against each other.  For example, if you have one spot left in the recruiting class, do you take the less smart, more talent kid or the more smart, less talent kid?  There are instances where they are, in fact, mutually exclusive.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

Reader71

November 11th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^

That is the least charitable reading of those words that is possible. I think it is more likely that he wants the new AD to work more closely with academic oversight. To make sure there are no corners cut. The AD can't set up bogus classes, they would need a conspirator in the faculty. If that is what Schlissel was insinuating, he could go right to the faculty member, not the AD.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

Reader71

November 11th, 2014 at 11:51 AM ^

They aren't euphemisms. "Cutting corners" can mean anything from pushing a kid into easy classes to changing his grades to setting up no show classes. It's a broad term, intentionally. And your second point really depends on what you mean by bogus. I did go to Michigan and did have a few classes with a lot of athletes. Most of them were easy classes, but they were open to all Michigan students. Most of them were with professors who didn't grade too harshly. Some of them were really pretty useless for most people, like Geology, Astronomy, and so on. The kids figure out where they can get easy credit, for sure. But those classes are out there, and I don't think they exist for the sake of the athletes. Introduction to dinosaurs is bound to be an easy course. Future archeologists will love it. There aren't many of those on the football team, but you can't fault them for exploiting the easy grade.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

IncrediblySTIFF

November 11th, 2014 at 1:24 PM ^

I don't know about the 20% thing.  I often signed up for classes that my teammates were in, just because it is more fun to have friends in your classes.  Additionally, I was required as a student-athlete to take a "life skills" class worth two credits in which although the class was not exclusive to athletes, 90% of the class was playing one sport or another.

Is this a "bogus" class?  I think not, as there are always classes such as "study skills" being offered to studfents.

Joined: 03/26/2011

MGoPoints: 7962

TIMMMAAY

November 11th, 2014 at 6:22 PM ^

Did you read the whole Daily article? He goes into much greater detail there than what's posted in the OP. It certainly came off to me that he was saying that there are clear signs that we've been doing very similar things to what UNC is dealing with, to a lesser extent. He even went as far as to say that if everyone weren't doing it, he'd "clean house". 

I think I really like this guy. He seems to have a very strong moral compass, and isn't willing to take any shit from anyone. He hits almost all the right notes when he speaks, and comes across as very confident and self-assured. I'm hopeful that he can get the program on the right course. 

Joined: 09/08/2008

MGoPoints: 56285

Reader71

November 11th, 2014 at 9:17 PM ^

Yeah I have now read it twice. I don't think he is suggesting any UNC-type impropriety. In fact, he repeatedly mentions low graduation rates, which suggest that school is too hard for some kids, not that the school is pushing undeserving kids through. To me, he is talking about the opposite of UNC -- we're bringing in incapable kids and hanging them out to dry. He's got a point. There were some guys on my teams that had no business being at a school like Michigan. For a while, I was one of them. As an underclassman, I was not ready to balance the requirements of football and school.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

patrickdolan

November 11th, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^

Idealistically: maintaining a university that--for its teaching and research--ranks in the top 20 in the world.

Pragmatically: maintaining a national research university in a time of declining state revenues and increasing costs without pricing it out of the reach of ordinary students.

Personally: Looking at people's investment in athletics to the exclusion of other things and wondering why those people are so crazy, and how to keep them from screwing up numbers one and two.

My belief is this: He'll take his time, and hires an AD who will take his (her?) time, and Hoke is with us next year. I think a lot of people will dislike that, but in my experience, that's how guys like that operate.

And no matter what the pace--quick or slow--if the AD screws it up, that person is toast. If they get it right, they're the second coming of Don Canham.

Joined: 07/10/2008

MGoPoints: 731

WolvinLA2

November 11th, 2014 at 5:29 PM ^

Exactly.  If Schlissel wants to de-emphasize athletics, which is what "taking his time finding an AD/HC" would do, then he's gonna have a lot of pissed off people and will likely have to fire a lot of people in the athletic department because it will lose a shitload of money.  

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

Real Tackles Wear 77

November 11th, 2014 at 9:40 AM ^

I don't think this means anything vis-a-vis the football coaching situation. I think it just means that the new AD, whoever it is, will have to work more closely with the academic side and make sure oversight is 100%. I think this is a good thing for the student athletes.

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 9685