Light shed on UMass football issues
To the editor:
Your recent editorial questioning the efficacy of the UMass football program upgrade shed necessary light on the issues. In addition, there are some other points I believe to be germane and thus worthy of consideration: The first game under the new program was an away game versus Connecticut in East Hartford. The first home game was at Gillette Stadium in Foxboro — almost twice as far from the campus as the away game. Something is wrong with this picture.
References to former Chancellor Holub’s role in approving the upgrade I believe to be inaccurate — he was simply a more visible fall guy. In fact, discussions began under former UMass President Jack Wilson, prior to Chancellor Holub’s arrival — and, indeed, even prior to President Wilson’s time.
Given the complexity and on-going debate, especially concerns expressed by the Faculty Senate, new Chancellor Kumble Subbaswammy’s endorsement was disappointing and premature.
It is implied — and indeed, oft stated — that there is somehow or other a correlation between a college’s football program and the repute of the institution. I suggest that one consider such football power-houses as Brandeis, MIT, CalTech and the Universiy of Chicago, among others, who seem to do quite well without such programs.
Unfortunately, logic does not seem to be a significant factor in the upgrade decision, alas.
Robert N. Brooks