PDA

View Full Version : Booing the Heels



orrnot
10-05-2009, 10:34 AM
"At UNC, in state tuition is $3,865 and out of state is $21,753. The math is obvious and easy: over four years in-state, tuition is $15,460; add a fifth year and itís $19,325.

Out of state that works out to $87,012 over four years and $108,765."

I'm not really quibbling with the point of the article (in this note anyway), but I wanted to point out that for tuition purposes, there's really no such thing as an out-of-state scholarship athlete in the UNC system, thanks to a generous legislature. That might seem a lucky break for athletes, but it's a REALLY lucky break for boosters and their favored programs.

dpslaw
10-05-2009, 11:22 AM
Not to quibble, but full athletic scholarships cover far more than the cost of tuition.

allenmurray
10-05-2009, 11:44 AM
I thought the DBR article on the main page was unfair to Caulton Tudor's main point (and I am no fan of Tudor's - I think he missed the retirement train about 5 years ago).

Tudor's point was that coaches are highly paid, and thus fans booing a coach is more acceptable than booing a 19 or 20 year old athlete. DBR says that athletes are well compensated. Even accepting DBR's valuation of a 4 year scholarship ($108k), their compensation compared to the head coach (8 million dollars over that same 4 year period) is starkly different.

They have taken Tudor out of context. Tudor's point was that an amatuer college-student athlete should not be subject to the same negative treatment (booed by his own fans) as a highly paid head coach. Unless DBR wants to take the position that fans should feel free to boo those athletes on the field, their point is irrelevant to Tudor's argument.

http://www.newsobserver.com/258/story/126926.html

Some readers think that it's in poor taste to boo anything about college athletics, and that's certainly their prerogative. It's an admirable conviction. But when a game ticket costs 50 bucks and the coaches are getting paid millions of dollars annually, the customers have every right to be heard.

But it's true that the coaches and the schools that hire them are raking in billions off football and men's basketball while the players settle for scholarship money and put their health on the line to benefit even that much. It may be a players' game, but it's definitely a coaches' and colleges' bounty.

. . . the catcalls are more about the people in charge of the program than the players in it.

eggfoam
10-05-2009, 11:59 AM
For that matter, it doesnít begin to touch the rest of the benefits, some of which are financial and some of which are simply pleasure-based, like a steady supply of willing women.


Also: is this bit really necessary? Does DBR really want to argue that readily available sex, even presuming this stereotype holds for all these scholarship athletes (including female ones?), constitutes part of a compensation package?? My first reaction is "eww," and my second is a feminist diatribe. (I'm a dude, BTW.)

allenmurray
10-05-2009, 12:45 PM
Also: is this bit really necessary? Does DBR really want to argue that readily available sex, even presuming this stereotype holds for all these scholarship athletes (including female ones?), constitutes part of a compensation package?? My first reaction is "eww," and my second is a feminist diatribe. (I'm a dude, BTW.)

I agree, DBR should give themselves an infraction for inappropraite content. I reccomend 3 points.

moonpie23
10-05-2009, 12:54 PM
i agree.......if my daughter were included in that "description".....i'd be a little miffed.


Is DBR suggesting that the entire female population of the student body is a "steady supply of willing women" for athlete's to include in their decision making process?


if not, please elaborate on which women "are" and which women are "not" part of that "supply".....

RelativeWays
10-05-2009, 01:04 PM
Maybe thats the mystery ingredient that gives UNC the edge over Duke in recruiting....







I kid, I kid. Even Shakespeare enjoyed a bawdy joke now and again :eek:

and for the record, you should never NEVER boo your team. Rant, whine and complain if you want but booing is something else. A lot of people here were frustrated with Duke during the Richmond game and the play calling in particular, but booing the team or Coach Cut seems counter to the culture we want to create. I know we're a fragile fanbase when it comes to football, we don't have to be fickle though.

JG Nothing
10-05-2009, 03:13 PM
Also: is this bit really necessary? Does DBR really want to argue that readily available sex, even presuming this stereotype holds for all these scholarship athletes (including female ones?), constitutes part of a compensation package?? My first reaction is "eww," and my second is a feminist diatribe. (I'm a dude, BTW.)

Let's not forget that ten percent of the athletes might prefer members of their own sex. How about a heterocentric diatribe?

moonpie23
10-05-2009, 04:57 PM
and for the record, you should never NEVER boo your team.


i agree completely

eggfoam
10-05-2009, 05:51 PM
Let's not forget that ten percent of the athletes might prefer members of their own sex. How about a heterocentric diatribe?

All relevant diatribes at the SAME TIME. That's the plan.

Son of Mojo
10-05-2009, 06:01 PM
I've never been a proponent of booing your own team. I can get ticked at decisions or missed plays but not to the point that I'm going to boo. I remember hearing a bit of it in '95 when Coach was out and it really upset me then. It's never a good idea and shows how little true passion you have for your team. I don't agree with it being done on the college or professional level--regardless if you pay for a ticket, if you paid to see who you claim to be your team, you should always have the hope and desire they're going to win. Have their back..... What does booing them do other than break their collective spirit and show you aren't really as behind them as you should be? In short--boo the opposition to your heart's content. Be tasteful (GTHC not withstanding......:D ), but boo THEM. Not. Your. Team.

Kewlswim
10-06-2009, 03:23 AM
Hi,

Hard to "boo" Duke teams because they are comprised of kids. Booing a pro team is much different. Most kids at Duke who participate in varsity sports will never earn a pay-check that way. Basketball is a notable exception. However, even booing the basketball team seems wrong. Those kids need our support.

I can't believe I am writing this, but I find it hard to actually boo UNC kids either. I root for Duke harder and more fervently than ever before though.

OK, if the kid can't listen because I am watching on tv, is it ok for me to boo the ref? I used to often boo the ref when our buddy in pale blue took a few steps to the basket and no traveling was called. Man that used to make me mad. Glad that guy is gone.

GO DUKE!!

sagegrouse
10-06-2009, 08:50 AM
It would have to be for disgraceful personal behavior by a player or coach.

Booing your NBA team after paying $100 bucks to watch a blowout loss with no energy and no obvious interest in the game? Sure....

sagegrouse

allenmurray
10-06-2009, 09:06 AM
It would have to be for disgraceful personal behavior by a player or coach.

Booing your NBA team after paying $100 bucks to watch a blowout loss with no energy and no obvious interest in the game? Sure....

sagegrouse

I agree - I think booing a college team is uncalled for.

However, it is important to remember Caulton Tudor's point (what started this thread was his column on the booing at Kenan Stadium and whether it was the UNC team being booed or the UNC coach). Given the salaries of college coaches (if the reported salary package of Butch Davis is correct he earns over $5k a day) if it is ever appropriate for anyone to be booed at a college game it is more appropriate for it to be directed at the coach than at the players. That seems hard to argue with.

DukieInKansas
10-06-2009, 04:15 PM
I've never been a proponent of booing your own team. I can get ticked at decisions or missed plays but not to the point that I'm going to boo. I remember hearing a bit of it in '95 when Coach was out and it really upset me then. It's never a good idea and shows how little true passion you have for your team. I don't agree with it being done on the college or professional level--regardless if you pay for a ticket, if you paid to see who you claim to be your team, you should always have the hope and desire they're going to win. Have their back..... What does booing them do other than break their collective spirit and show you aren't really as behind them as you should be? In short--boo the opposition to your heart's content. Be tasteful (GTHC not withstanding......:D ), but boo THEM. Not. Your. Team.

I agree. I figure that unless I am willing to go out and do what they are doing and do it better, I have nothing to boo about.

I even have a hard time booing opponents, especially individual players. Sometimes, I'm ok with booing the opposing team name. And I have made exceptions for a few particularly dirty pro football players.

brevity
10-06-2009, 05:41 PM
Is there a difference between booing the coach and booing the players? For those on the field, it probably sounds the same.

allenmurray
10-06-2009, 05:47 PM
Is there a difference between booing the coach and booing the players? For those on the field, it probably sounds the same.

I wouldn't do either, for the very reason you cite (it sounding the same). However, I think that depending on timing it may be possible to tell when a decision is being booed vs. when a play or player is being booed.

-jk
10-06-2009, 06:07 PM
(Would it be wrong to point out that booing the Heels is always in good form? Probably. Pay no attention to this post.)

hurleyfor3
10-07-2009, 01:41 PM
Let's not forget that ten percent of the athletes might prefer members of their own sex. How about a heterocentric diatribe?

You'd still be leaving out A.C. Green.

Kfanarmy
10-07-2009, 02:52 PM
Is there really any gain of discussing the "ick factor," secondary benefits, sexual orientation etc in this thread that furthers the basic discussion of "booing" here...Just seems like so much purposeless chatter.

pbc2
10-07-2009, 03:00 PM
Agreed that booing college athletes is inappropriate. These are amateur, 18-22 year old kids.

My wife and I have a difficult time at football games this year, as a fellow season ticket holder in our section finds it ok to not only boo some of the Duke players, but single them out and scream about how terrible they are. At one point during the VA Tech game, he was screaming about how terrible Boyette is, so I finally turned to him and let him know that Scott was in the game.

These kids are playing their butts off for Duke, they deserve our support.

chrishoke
10-07-2009, 03:14 PM
I can't believe no one has mentioned the Jeff Capel booing incident. How can you tell if folks are booing the coach for his decision to put Capel in the game, or booing the player because they are disppointed in his play. As I recall, Carolina fans were convinced that duke fans were booing Capel. How do we know that the UNC fans were not booing their QB who was having a bad day.