Dave Brandon Question Suggestions

Submitted by MGoShoe on March 29th, 2011 at 10:45 PM
I'm attending the U-M Club of Washington's annual congressional breakfast Wed morning. Dave Brandon and MSC will be there. Your suggestions for a question to either are solicited. Snark away if you must, but serious inquiries will get serious consideration. Edit: Brandon bowed out last night. Good venting below anyhow. Met Congressman Jon Runyan. Big dude.

Comments

Mitch Cumstein

March 29th, 2011 at 10:49 PM ^

I would be interested in a question to either DB or MSC about title IX and the role it plays in inhibiting expansion of M men's sports, or accelerating the potentially premature promotion of female M sports.  Also, if they think this restriction needs to be altered in the future.

cp4three2

March 29th, 2011 at 11:19 PM ^

The school vacated the entire 1992–93 season and every game it played from the 1995–96 season through the 1998–99 season. This included the 1997 National Invitation Tournament title and the 1998 Big Ten Tournament title. It also vacated its two Final Four games in 1992 and its entire NCAA tournament record in 1993, 1996, 1998 and 1999. 

M Fanfare

March 29th, 2011 at 11:43 PM ^

Both of the banners say "NCAA Finalist", meaning the banner commemorates the team having played in the National Championship Game. Both of those games were vacated, as were the semifinals preceding them. Hence, both banners went down.

Bando Calrissian

March 30th, 2011 at 12:23 AM ^

Because you don't celebrate achievements won with a player that ultimately proved to be uneligible?  

I know you want that banner up, but an NCAA Finalist or Final Four banner doesn't celebrate a win in the Elite 8, but rather an appearance in a game in the Final Four.  Which, according to the self-imposed sanctions, were vacated by the University of Michigan.

Give it up.  Those banners are staying in the basement of the Bentley.  Where they belong.  Have a problem with that?  Take it up with the Webber family.

jmblue

March 30th, 2011 at 12:34 AM ^

I don't know if I agree with that definition, which seems awfully nitpickety.  There is a legitimate gray area here, given that Martin didn't become a booster until after we beat OSU to clinch the trip to Minneapolis.  The NCAA, by not vacating those first four games in 1992, has decreed that we rightfully earned a spot in that Final Four, even if the two subsequent games could not count.  We therefore should be allowed to raise a banner that says "Final Four" on it, just as the 1964, '65, '76 and '89 banners read.  And I think it'd be a fair compromise to at least raise that one.  Put it up and the 14 guys on the team who did nothing wrong can celebrate their legacy again.  The '93 one, OTOH, will have to stay in storage.

 

BlueDragon

March 29th, 2011 at 11:01 PM ^

For MSC:  What are your plans to make U-M a more affordable option for out-of-state residents, especially in a down economy when more families' financial options are limited?

SWFLWolverine

March 30th, 2011 at 11:48 AM ^

I would say that it is not the taxypaying citizens of the state of Michigan's responsibility to fund the education of out-of-state students to their public institutions. In fact, I would call that a misuse and abuse of tax dollars. Second, I would that that any out-of-state student that qualifies for and gains acceptance into the University of Michigan would certainly qualify for other scholarships to offset the price of their education. Lastly, wouldn't this be a function of local alumni groups? I'm sure they do more than get together for beer and football on Satruday afternoons in the fall.

BlueDragon

March 30th, 2011 at 12:00 PM ^

I would say that it is not the taxypaying citizens of the state of Michigan's responsibility to fund the education of out-of-state students to their public institutions. In fact, I would call that a misuse and abuse of tax dollars.

Should Michigan only offer financial aid to students who are residents of the state of Michigan, since using Michigan tax dollars to fund the education of out-of-state students is, as you put it, a misuse of tax dollars?

Second, I would that that any out-of-state student that qualifies for and gains acceptance into the University of Michigan would certainly qualify for other scholarships to offset the price of their education.

I assume that you are a resident of Michigan.  It's hard to pay double tuition as an out-of-state resident.  I attended U of M from 2006 to 2010, and the most scholarship aid I got was a $500 award for good acts my sophomore year.  All my other aid came from grants and loans. It's almost laughable how little money the University gives out in terms of scholarships to out-of-state students. I was one of the best students in my high school. Johns Hopkins offered me $12,000 a year before regular financial aid. Case Western offered me about a half ride. I came to Michigan for the strong music program, but for students not as intimately wedded to coming to Michigan for one specific program, the overal lack of scholarship aid offered to out-of-state residents will hurt the University's affordability and attractiveness to potential students.

SWFLWolverine

March 30th, 2011 at 12:19 PM ^

I would say that state institutions should only fund in-state students. That may not be the case, but I think it should be. I am not a resident of Michigan and did not attend Michigan, I was born in Columbus and moved to Florida at 14.  I have a BS and MEd from USF.  I too had to make use of loans and grants to get myself though college. I understand the hardship in doing so, however, why should the people be taxed to fund a public institution that then passes their dollars on to citizens of other states? If you choose to attend a public university in another state, you should be prepared to pay the full cost of tuition. Should instate students pay more to help fund out-of-state students? I don't know what to tell you about the scholarships...I would think that a 3.5+ and a 1200+ SAT/25+ ACT could gain many scholarships. Perhaps your guidance dept at your HS was simply aweful!

jcorqian

March 30th, 2011 at 1:45 PM ^

I'm sorry, but your comment "I would think that a 3.5+ and a 1200+ SAT/25+ ACT could gain many scholarships. Perhaps your guidance dept at your HS was simply aweful!" is completely off base.

I currently am a senior about to graduate from the business school with over a 4.0 (yes, there is grade inflation).  In high school, I got a 34 on the ACT and had a 4.6 GPA due to AP/Honors classes.  Guess how much money I got from the University of Michigan for scholarships?  $0.  Before being admitted to the business school, I was in the College of Engineering, so maybe it would have been different for LSA.  However, if I had the same grades and I was in-state, I would have gotten probably a lot of money, maybe even a half-ride.  You don't think that this is somewhat unfair for kids who perform well academically to be discriminated this much simply because of the state they live in?  I agree give preference to kids in Michigan, but why would you hand out half-rides to 3.8 GPA 30 ACT score kids in Michigan while passing over kids such as myself whose family's have to pay the full out of state tuition?  It is pretty lopsided in fairness IMO.

BlueDragon

March 30th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^

Took the words right out of my mouth.  I had a similar academic record from high school and I got no scholarship aid from U of M.  In the music program, the in-state kids got what few generous scholarships were offered to undergraduate students.

SWFLWolverine:  I am simply reporting on my own experiences as an undergraduate at the University of Michigan, and how hard it is to come up with a financial plan as an out of state student to pay for the cost of education there.  The University is not doing its out of state students any favors by essentially doubling tuition and offering virtually no scholarship aid to those students.  For the record, my high school happens to be one of the best in Ohio, and the guidance counselor that I had helped other family members with their college decision.

SWFLWolverine

March 30th, 2011 at 3:22 PM ^

My point being that the University of Michigan is not the only entity that gives out scholarships, there are plenty of private entities that do so as well and if your guidance department is not getting that information into the hands of their advanced learners there is a huge problem within that department. I wasn't suggesting that the University of Michigan should be the ones giving out scholarships to out-of-state students.

Once again...a public institution that is funded by the state and paid for by its citizens ought to be looking out for those citizens...that is fair. Attending the University of Michigan was a choice on your part, you could have gone somewhere else for half-price or less...if cost was an issue, you should have chosen the other route. If you feel that your education and experience was worth the tuition...stop complaining, the people of the state of Michigan don't owe you anything.

If you feel this strongly about the issue, when you become financially sound in business (Medicine for Blue Dragon IIRC) please consider funding a scholarship to a hs senior who gains acceptance and attends UofM.

dennisblundon

March 29th, 2011 at 11:06 PM ^

I would like to know if there are plans for adding more seats to the Big House in the future. Rumor was that when the score board went in 5,000 seats or so maybe added, as of now, I haven't heard anything else about it.

trueblueintexas

March 29th, 2011 at 11:11 PM ^

When you look at the demographic trends of population moving from the north to the south (Detroit is now less than 750K residents), how do you see Michigan being able to compete in the future?

jmblue

March 30th, 2011 at 12:43 AM ^

The city of Detroit's population loss has little to do with people moving south.  It's almost entirely due to people moving to the surrounding counties: Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw, which collectively grew by about the same amount that Wayne County lost.

Zone Left

March 29th, 2011 at 11:20 PM ^

For MSC: "What challenges does the University face to remain an elite educational institution while its home state's economy crumbles and an inordinate number of graduates immediately leave the state after graduation? Is the University struggling to attract and retain top student and faculty talent?"

Serious question I'd like to hear the answer to.

jmblue

March 30th, 2011 at 12:51 AM ^

I'm pretty sure the answer to that is no.  The University is still a very prestigious place to work and attend school; that hasn't changed.  The recent grads leaving the state, by and large, aren't people looking for jobs in academia.  And given that enrollment keeps creeping upward (it's around 41,000 now, an increase of about 5,000 in a decade), attracting talented students doesn't seem to be a problem.  In fact, MSC has suggested that the she'd like the student body to be slightly reduced in size.

Lloyd's Boy

March 29th, 2011 at 11:24 PM ^

I would be interested to hear DB's reaction to some of the off the field issues happening in college football (fiesta bowl scandal, Tatgate, etc), and how he feels the NCAA should handle these situations.

philhersey

March 29th, 2011 at 11:46 PM ^

Is playing for Bo and getting along with the pizza king really all it takes to become AD? What was your degree in? Can you explain where you learned "the process"? Don't you care that Michigan has never had a nationally competitive football program?