We'll let the New York Times have the last word on this matter before we know the actual decision:
Within hours of the stunning news last summer that U.C.L.A. was bolting the Pac-12 Conference, along with the University of Southern California, for a rich Big Ten media contract, emails began peppering the inbox of U.C.L.A.’s athletic director, Martin Jarmond... It was much the same for the inbox of Chancellor Gene D. Block...
The nearly four dozen angry emails sent to the athletic director or the chancellor in the immediate aftermath of the June 30 announcement largely decried the move, sometimes less than politely, as a shortsighted, tradition-ignoring money grab...
Asked afterward why U.C.L.A. had not garnered much public support for the move, Jarmond declined to comment...
While the Regents have raised questions about whether U.C.L.A.’s exit creates new problems while solving current ones, some on the board have expressed unease with reversing a decision because of the precedent it would set. In the end, even if the Regents leave Wednesday’s meeting having removed a final obstacle for U.C.L.A.’s move to the Big Ten, they may share a prevailing sentiment: little enthusiasm for it.
Full story at https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/13/sports/ncaafootball/ucla-big-ten-uc-regents.html.
The Times does note that "the sample size [of emails received] may be too small to judge the move’s opposition." But there is more than a sample size issue. People who are angry are more likely than those who are not to send emails, so there is probably a biased sample. And maybe the small size suggests that larger public opinion is indifferent to the issue. It costs nothing except a bit of effort to send an email.
===
https://ia601402.us.archive.org/25/items/big-ten/angry%20email.mp3
No comments:
Post a Comment