Giant Book Sale

Article Tools

Use the form below to share this article via email.


Your name:

Your email:

To email:

Message:

Possibly Related:

Blind faith or pious loyalty?

Last updated: 09/03/10 11:26am

Standing before them is a divided congregation: There are the believers and the athletic agnostics.

Faith, though, is inextricably binding and blinding. Bound by a uniform goal, but blinded by its improbability, the UNM football team is set to embark on another season under the direction of second-year head coach Mike Locksley.

Without everyone aboard the Conestoga bandwagon, the Lobos journey down the Oregon Trail to adrenaline-crazed Autzen Stadium as 34-point underdogs — Locksley’s mission to convert a host of doubting Thomases.

However reasonable a goal that is, well, that’s for the Lobos to decide.
The objective truth remains that season ticket sales have slid, down from 13,698 last year to 11,490 as of Thursday. In Oregon, the Lobos face an inexorable offensive force.

A quick glance at the schedule proves sobering, coupled with the fact that, dating back to 2002, 23 teams have won one or less game a season. Of those 23 teams, six won just one more game the next season. Half as many teams (3) won six more games, and only Tulsa in 2003 and UCF in 2005 won seven or more games the next season, after going 1-11 and 0-11, respectively, the year before.
In the absence of all the empirical, Locksley was asked what an ideal season-opener would be for the Lobos.
“A game that’s winnable,” Locksley said.

By definition, all games are winnable. Doesn’t mean the Lobos will win any.
It’s worth remembering that the season begins, but does not end, with the Ducks. Yet it’s not far-fetched to think that in order to breed faith, fans will want to see measurable progress come Saturday. In last year’s season-opener, the Lobos fell to Texas A&M 41-6.

That, unfortunately, might just have been part of the growing process. I cannot, in good faith, neglect Locksley’s graduated scale.
Marked year-to-year improvements, Locksley said, can be gauged by looking at an opponent’s margin of victory. On teams he has been a part of in Year 1, they usually lost big. By the following season, the gap was narrowed significantly. And by Year 3 and Year 4, those teams went from just winning games to blowing opponents out.
But not everyone is as patient as Locksley.

Wide receiver Chris Hernandez said there is no column for moral victories — only wins and losses.

“If we don’t go to a bowl this season, or if we don’t have a winning season, I view that as a failure,” Hernandez said. “That’s just personally. I can’t speak for everybody. I really expect a lot from this team. For us not to make the giant strides that we expect, I think would be a failure.”

Defensive end Jaymar Latchison wasn’t as much of an absolutist. “Everybody talks about what happened last year, and everybody talks about how good they are, so, really, we’re in a no-pressure situation,” he said.

Speak for yourself, Jaymar.
Might I add, respectfully, that Locksley, according to Sports Illustrated, is the national coach on the hot seat. Not only that, but the Lobos are, “All In,” according to their motto. Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t that mean the Lobos either double up or walk away from the table empty-handed? So, then, there’s a lot on the line.

Not that it bothers Latchison.

“Somebody’s coming at me saying, ‘Oh, you got Oregon.’ No, Oregon has us,” Latchison said at a Lobo spring practice. “You better get it straight. It’s not like we’re going to be some pushovers.”

Not being pushovers, like they were last year, will fill the pews at University Stadium, as will doing the “things that lead to winning — how our players prepare, how they execute in practice, the effort they give in practice and in games and then the discipline it takes to win,” Locksley said.

Suffice it to say, if Locksley can unite Lobo parishioners, this year’s season will be a success.

Published September 2, 2010 in Sports

16 comments



Academic

September 3, 2010 at 7:57 AM
Flag this comment

And then there are those of who just think it’s a corrupt money pit run by a bully with a bad temper. Alas, we know when Locksley quits (or goes to jail), the next guy will just take even more money away from academic.


WashingtonDCduck

September 3, 2010 at 9:53 AM
Flag this comment

Hey Academic,

As much as you despise college athletics don’t forget how much exposure the ‘corrupt’ athletic departments give your university and a plethora of other advantages. Who cares about some out in the middle of no where school like New Mexico? Or my alma matter Oregon? NOBODY. I live back east, and the only reason small demographical universities like mine, The University of Oregon, have any name brand recognition is because of OUR SPORTS! As much as undergraduate and graudate research and how many books get published by recognized faculty, it doesn’t hold a candle to what the athletic departments do for the school.

Read more …

And FYI, not every athletic department (i.e. football programs) take money from the general academic fund pot. A LOT of schools actually make money, and give money back to the general academic fund, like at the U of O’s.

Best of luck to the Lobos tomorrow in Eugene.


Red

September 3, 2010 at 2:19 PM
Flag this comment

DCDuck,
Blah, blah, blah. As a matter of fact, athletics programs, no matter how successful, do not contribute to academics in universities. Universities exist for teaching and research, not so a bunch of musclebound momma’s boys in hot pants can run around jumping on each other. No one who’s serious about learning or education would choose to attend or work at a university based on its athletic “brand.” That is an absurd claim, sir.

Also, I challenge you to present one shred of evidence that demonstrates that “A LOT” of athletics programs in the country actually contribute to their academic funds. They are few and far between (and definitely don’t include UNM). If they actually did sell enough tickets to make a profit, it would likely just line the pockets of “Sluggin’ Mike” Locksley and the rest of the athletic department lackeys.

Read more …

Lobo football is nothing but a financial, educational, and spiritual drain on the university.


BooHoo

September 3, 2010 at 2:53 PM
Flag this comment

Red, were you the one always picked last in PE? A University experience is supposed to be a holistic one, not just academic. That includes athletics, the arts and entertainment. Have a great weekend!


Lawrence

September 3, 2010 at 3:24 PM
Flag this comment

BooHoo,

A university education should include a class in logic and rhetoric:

Read more …

>> Red, were you the one always picked last in PE?

a classic example of an ‘ad hominem’ falacious argument. Which proves you have no facts or arguments on your side so all you can do is resort to personal attack.

Red is bringing up valid arguments. He’s correctly pointing out that DCDuck is mistaken: university athletic programs typically operate at a loss, and the UNM program most certainly is. In fact, football is the most expensive and wasteful of the team sports.

If Red (and me) are wrong, PROVE IT.

I wish the Lobos well, although I think the odds are against them — the PAC-10 is simply a superior conference. But facts are facts: intercollegiate sports drain money from academics.


FACTS

September 3, 2010 at 3:55 PM
Flag this comment

@lawrence

as per your request.


FACTS

September 3, 2010 at 3:56 PM
Flag this comment

http://www.unm.edu/~budget/guidelines/glpresentation/Athletics.pdf


Red

September 3, 2010 at 9:45 PM
Flag this comment

FACTS,
Budgets include both revenue and expenditures. Submitting a projected list of revenues without the corresponding expenses (or the actual revenues for that matter) means nothing. Don’t try to pass it off as proof that the athletics department is making tons of money for the university. Plus, over 1.5 million of that comes from mandatory student fees, that might otherwise be used to buy books or materials or simply go back into the pockets of students who need it. And wasn’t Paul Krebs just in the news the other day rattling his tin cup trying to get another 1million out of the regents to fix the baseball field?

And BooHoo, I’m all in favor of playing sports, intermural sports, physical education, exercising, etc. You’re right that an athletic education is part of a holistic education. You are wrong, however, if you think that having 10 guys on the basketball team and 50 on the football team constitutes physically educating the university’s student. It is the business of big sports that has no place at the university, especially when it is not self-funding.


Red

September 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM
Flag this comment

Also, FACTS, the budget you provide lists a $100,000 transfer from the UNM endowment to the athletics department. So perhaps you can explain how that is not taking money from academic programs…


zach

September 3, 2010 at 11:10 PM
Flag this comment

academics blow, fire all the profesors and all the money should go to sports (;


FACTS

September 4, 2010 at 3:04 PM
Flag this comment

red, there are three pages, the last two including expenses. i stated no opinion one way or the other, merely presented the FACTS, as per your request. you are now free to refer to it in your arguments, as you aleady have. the problem is you’ve directed it at the wrong person. I don’t need to explain anything as i don’t give a fuck. you read your own agenda into my post. clearly someone just likes to fight. read my post again and tell me where i state ANY opinion what-so-ever. thank you your welcome and go blow yourself.


Red

September 4, 2010 at 9:05 PM
Flag this comment

FACTS,
My apologies. I didn’t see the pages with the expenses. And you’re right that I wrongly assumed you to be defending the use of university dollars for athletics.

Now that I’ve seen the entire budget, It’s worth mentioning that the athletics department only projects $16,000 in profits for the year. Without the $100,000 the AD gets from the UNM endowment and the 1.5 million in student funds, they would be very deep in the hole indeed. Not exactly self sustaining, and certainly not giving money back to academics.


Phillip Howel

September 5, 2010 at 7:38 AM
Flag this comment

LAWRENCE ET ALL, way to go for showing the enormous $$ drain and other resources football requires. What other univ activity gets 2 grass fields 360’ x 160’ PLUS the stands, etc. Anyone who goes on that grass without the permission of the AD can be arrested. And how about that 6 figure “weight” room training facility!! Which students can use it? Students, that $1.5/million of student fees is money forceable taken from your wallet. Think you can attend UNM without paying those fees?

Not included in these general numbers are the dollars the legislature provides for specific projects.

Read more …

WASHINGTONDCDUCK, which do you believe an employer cares about, the football team or the quality – the reputation – of the academic studies department, the classes the prospect took and his grades, 11-1 rather than 1-11. How does the won-loss record effect the non-jock student?

BTY, one of the finest academic colleges in this country is Hillsdale College, a true liberal arts school, which has a full athletic program that does not consume millions, yet provides the athletic experience.


longtimelobo

September 6, 2010 at 9:57 AM
Flag this comment

Well, how does it feel now? 72-0
The football program can be respectable to good with several coaches. But this guy is the worst ever.

Lobo football is worth saving.
But not with this coach.


EMM

September 7, 2010 at 12:22 PM
Flag this comment

If you want a purely educational college experience then switch over to CNM. You’re welcome.


Blah, blah, blah

September 7, 2010 at 2:19 PM
Flag this comment

Blah, blah, blah NO switch that loser coach Thugsley to CNM!

Comments are closed for this item.