Friday, April 15, 2005

Furstenberg's Ghost

The Daily Pennsylvanian claims that Penn values athletics more than Dartmouth does.

This sounds similar to the comments made by Yale football coach Jack Siedlecki:

"As a parent, it would certainly make me question sending my son or daughter to Dartmouth to be a student athlete."

Such criticisms can continue (to the detriment of Dartmouth's athletic prowess and campus community) until Dean Furstenberg resigns, is fired, or gives a more meaningful apology.

4 comments:

Ben said...

Don't see it (the article) as referring to Furstenburg at all.

It's more of a case that Penn is currently the top dog in football and men's basketball, the two highest profile sports. Meanwhile Dartmouth's been toiling near the cellar in those two sports.

Much like the idiot from Columbia who claimed they were a better sports school than Dartmouth, just point out Penn's lack of hockey (even though they have a decent rink on campus) and move on.

TO said...

Ben's right. Chalk it up to rivalry, examine the merits and move on.

Since when has it been the Review's position that criticism from other schools is a strong reason for Dartmouth to change?

If Harvard started bragging about its greater number of Rhodes Scholars and Nobel Prize winners on the faculty, would you call for Dartmouth to acquire a law school and a government school and start focusing more on research?

Is the media flap over the Zetemouth a "criticism that can continue (to the detriment of Dartmouth's social prowess and campus community) until the administration gets rid of the Greek system or takes more meaningful steps to phase it out?"

The Yale football coach is about as neutral as it gets.

Is every taunt from a rival an imperative to respond?

Kale said...

I guess I wasn putting it in with other people knocking Dartmouth's commitment to athletics after the Furstenberg flap.

To respond to TO's point, first of all, this isn't the Zetemouth incident. Second, I'm not saying that Dartmouth should change any old thing because it's rivals tell it to. But I am saying it needs to be confident in its identity. When Furstenberg is allowed to remain, even though he isn't entirely at fault for the athletic decline, Dartmouth is wavering in its mission and heritage to its own detriment. It's a self-reinforcing cycle. The College is not seizing its opportunity.

David said...

How did the Zetemouth get involved in this? First of all, in response to the media flap, Dartmouth de-recognized Zete (which seemed to be the culprit, rather than the Greek system as a whole). But that's not the point; the Zete fiasco is a prime example of why the College SHOULDN'T respond to media attention. Now it's getting media attention for not RE-recognizing Zete. Its kneejerk reaction to the media was at least as bad, if not worse, than what Zete did in the first place.

Second, the Yale football coach (despite coaching the only team in the Ivy League that's arguably worse than ours) is a critic worthier of our attention than the media, since he understands the pressures and has some clue what the hell is going on. (As opposed to the Daily Pennsylvanian. That's like the D, for god's sake!)

Third, I think everyone should get over the Karl Furstenberg thing.... He was wrong, but the problem here is James Wright, the Trustees and the whole Dartmouth administration/conspiracy (not excluding Furstenberg, of course). All Furstenberg has done is put his foot squarely in his mouth and partway down his esophagus. Wright, meanwhile, has declared war on not just athletics but also alumni, fraternities, civil liberties, and the College's undergraduate focus. In this context, I can't understand why the incidient about which everyone is upset is the Dean of Admissions calling athletes thugs. Bad, yes. The worst problem in the Dartmouth administration? It's not even in the top 10.