NEWSROOM:
(541)346-5511
EMAIL
ode<<rorcgrjn. uoregon.edu
ON-UNE EDITION:
www.uoregon.edu/~ode
©regotxWCmerattr
EDITOR IN CHIEF
Ryan Frank
EDITORIAL EDITOR
Kameron Cole
Thumbs
A
THUMBS UP
To the Ducks.
For earning national
respect and giving
even non-football fans
a reason to tune in on
Saturday. Ultimately,
we can forgive the
turnovers.
To all tlw players on
both teams:
For playing through
heat, injuries and
puke on the field to
deliver one of the best
college football
games in recent
memory.
V/
THUMBS DOWN
To the Ducks:
For too many
turnovers. One or two
we could understand,
but five?
To UCLA’s Cade Mc
Mown:
For vomiting on the
field, on national televi
sion in front of thou
sands of fans. We
could have gone ail day
without that,Cade.
CQMBCnON
In “Goodail shares
monkey business"
(ODE, Oct. 16) the
headline should have
identified the monkeys
as chimpanzees. The
Emerald regrets the
error.
Fair weather funding
Donors shouldn't wait for a winning
season to dole out big contributions
Don’t get us wrong; we love the Ducks. Well,
actually some of us are fairly indifferent to the
Ducks. And some of us are inexplicably hostile to
ward the Ducks. For the most part, though, we
love the Ducks.
And as the year draws to a close, it seems that
we have yet another reason to love the Ducks.
The Oregon Campaign, a six-year fund raising
effort by the University, will culminate this De
cember having raised more than $232 million.
The original goal of the Oregon Campaign was
$150 million and was raised to $200 million when
the campaign hit the benchmark ahead of sched
ule.
Here’s where the Ducks come in. Contributions
to the Oregon Campaign reached their highest lev
els during 1995-1996, the year after the football
team made it to the Rose Bowl. The next most
profitable year was 1996-1997, the Cotton Bowl
year. The next time donors were feeling particu
larly generous was 1997-1998, the year the Ducks
waddled down to Nevada for the Las Vegas Bowl.
You don’t have to draw too heavily on your col
lege education to see the connections here. The
m_
donors who give to the Oregon Campaign are ob
viously people who care about the school, often
alumni. Perhaps they care just a wee bit more
when something happens to make the school
more visible — like a big football year.
This is not a unique concept. Schools like Stan
ford and USC have been successfully milking the
alumni-sports connection for years. To be fair, we
have to acknowledge here that private contribu
tors donated to the Oregon Campaign for a variety
of reasons.
Sports may not have been the only impetus for
the influx in funds, but it’s a good bet that they
were a major influence. Let’s face it. Donors prob
ably weren’t scrambling for their checkbooks be
cause of their enthusiasm for zebrafish research.
Of course, none of this is to say that these con
tributions are bad. To the contrary, they present
an enormous boon to all students. The new law
school is one of the projects partially funded by
the campaign. The administration also reports that
an increase in scholarships, new equipment and
new fields of study are all going to be made possi
ble by the Oregon Campaign cash.
But there are questions here that beg to be
asked. What if the football
three bowl games in four years? Would the Ore
gon Campaign have been such a ringing success?
One of the criticisms often leveled at private cit
izens who contribute to public entities like uni
versities is that donors often disproportionately fa
vor athletic programs. This is a thorny point to
argue. If someone like, oh, let’s say Phil Knight,
wants to give $25 million, and the University
wants to take it, does anyone really care why he
wants to give it?
Indeed, someone should care about how and
why contributions are made. It is somewhat un
settling to think that we might not be able to pro
vide funding for facilities and programs that en
rich the educations of us all if the Ducks miss a
touchdown or blow a field goal.
As the athletic program revels in what is shap
ing up to be a banner year, these concerns don’t
seem too weighty. Nevertheless, even the 1998
Ducks are subject to the vagaries of fate.
If alumni and other private contributors really
want to show their commitment to the Universi
ty, then they should support the institution as a
whole all year long, not just when there’s a big
game on the line.
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald
editorial board. Responses may Ik sent
- toode@oregon.uoregon.edu.
No
W/nm/nq
Seasom
ITS Pps-rrr
£*sr SOT’S/
✓
O'*#0-/
»"-«*9S0
THi DUNK..
the
Turnover.
THE
FAST
BR€A*
deposits
r
-THIS U$ED
to ec Such a
ClASSY
NFIgjHpORHOOO^