Sat in on the conference call today between USU Pres. Stan Albrecht and the Board of Trustees. We’ll have audio and more discussion on tonight’s show, but here are a few of the highlights from the conversation:
- With a 13% increase in applications, a 1% increase in enrollment is projected (Estimated $3 million “need”).
- USU is 2nd to last in the west for tuition costs for out of state students (University of Wyoming is lower).
- Breakdown for USU funds: 68% state funds, 32% tuition.
- Average expected tuition increase from other institutions is 7%. 5% to 8% was the starting range for discussion.
- Proposal: 4.5 % Tier II increase at USU.
Exact amounts weren’t available, but a 4% increase would equal a $76 hike per semester for students, an 5% increase would be $95. The increase at USU would be “somewhere” in the middle… $85 (ish). Scott Watterson made the final proposal for vote, none opposed. Several “congrats” were offered to Albrecht for the success of the athletics fee increase campaign.
One of the hosts today, Mark I think, in talking about how athletic reputation does not affect the prestige of the university and the job you get, just over halfway through the following podcast…
http://www.cachevalleydaily.com/podcast/FTP-03-25-2009A.mp3
“If we’re going to use the analogy that the better athletics does the better you’re going to do in your career as a graduate of Utah State, then we’re going to use it when Utah State athletics doesn’t do well.”
Then he goes on to say that USU grads are likely to stay in Utah and may interview with a BYU grad, who will grind into your face that BYU is too good to play USU in football, and that he’d rather hire a Utah grad because at least they can get into a BCS bowl.
This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard, since you were trying to make one point but you made the opposite point. If the analogy works one way, it works both ways in this situation. That is exactly the point in increasing USU’s reputation in athletics. If we have a successful football and basketball team, we will be treated better. If we have bad football and basketball teams, we will be treated worse. Yes. That is the point in doing everything we can to increase the football team’s success. We are treated poorly because of the football team’s lack of success recently. Everyone is embarrassed by the football team, and we don’t like talking about it. I understand the point you were trying to make, but you made the opposite.
It was me making the point, Don, and it’s not an accurate fact. The point were made in an “if this is true, then…”
If athletics prestige equals alumni success in finding jobs, then no Aggie would have a job right now because the football program has been so pathetic and Aggie basketball is 1-9 in the NCAA/NIT the past 10 years.
Yes, athletics might be a good talking point with a potential new employer for them to start small talk before the meat and potatoes of an interview. (“Hey, I saw your football team won, good job…”) But if you’re getting a job or not getting a job based on how the sports team did at your school, you’re probably interviewing at a lame duck employer or interviewing with a very, very shallow HR person. People get jobs based on their resume and experience, not based on how many touchdown passes the quarterback throws or how deep into the postseason the volleyball team advances.
I don’t know about other people’s experiences… but I usually get the impression when I would go to an interview, the person I was speaking with was more concerned about me being able to do the job than the performance of the USU football team. In fact, it never came up.
I have had personal experience where I was hired over a graduate of a school with a nationally recognized team, so I can only say that USU football has had absolutely no effect on my career performance.