Phil's comment to Regents on race - WTF?

[J.R. Ewing]

I've seen him on road trips shaking donors hands. I know that he understands the concept of athletics as a front porch, but I don't think he cares all that much if we win titles. His actions before Benson turned his focus from the medical center are pretty clear.

 

[Buffnik]

Ralphie Report with good coverage that put things in context: http://www.ralphiereport.com/2016/7...no-black-athletes-refer-to-champion-center-as

DiStefano didn't shy away from talking about a topic that has been at the forefront of the national conversation for quite some time. The racial divide has conquered the talk of the media and it's clear CU intentions have focused on creating a better environment on campus.

Here's a video from Febuarary of this year with DiStefano prompting a conversation on how to make the campus more inclusive to students.

 

[MtnBuff]

Can we merge the two threads?




Thank you



This is absolutely not true. I can understand why you would think this based on today's statements, but I have had personal conversations with him and can say based on that that he does understand that Athetics is the "front porch of the University [his words].

I can also agree that the criticism of his statements today, and actions in the past are 100% justified, your charactism of him above is wrong.

So in what way is CU-Boulder better off because of Dr. Phil.

He is very good at giving lip service when it serves his purpose but he has been terrible for CU football. Outside of athletics tell me which academic area has increased in national stature due to his efforts, has our faculty overall improved, has our national reputation advanced? I don't see it. He has been in office long enough that regular followers of the school should be able to identify accomplishments that he has had a significant hand in. What are those.

 

[Denver_sc]

Ralphie Report with good coverage that put things in context: http://www.ralphiereport.com/2016/7...no-black-athletes-refer-to-champion-center-as

DiStefano didn't shy away from talking about a topic that has been at the forefront of the national conversation for quite some time. The racial divide has conquered the talk of the media and it's clear CU intentions have focused on creating a better environment on campus.

Here's a video from Febuarary of this year with DiStefano prompting a conversation on how to make the campus more inclusive to students.

I am glad that leadership at CU wants to have this discussion. I think it's a good and important discussion to have.

However, I haven't heard anything from DiStefano regarding diversity prior to February (note that in the video he says that we can count on more "posts" in the coming days and weeks on this subject- that video is the last chronologically on CU's Youtube channel that has anything to do with an "inclusive campus"), and someone who reacts to whichever way the political wind is blowing, like DiStefano, is the last person who should be leading this discussion.

 

[Medford M.]

We are clear that these weren't Phil's comments, and he was just sharing someone else's thoughts right?

 

[SuperD]

Diversity is an issue that CU needs to work on, but only at CU would an administrator drop that juicy headline quote the day before Pac 12 media day. Now instead of questions about the new facilities and our uptick in recruiting all the questions from the national guys are going to be on this topic. Ugh...

 

[Deleted member 807]

We are clear that these weren't Phil's comments, and he was just sharing someone else's thoughts right?

Yes and no. I don't expect Phil will disclose the source, and I would be surprised the source will step forward and corroborate Phil's rendition.

You are aware that Phil was responsible for the akward phrasing and timing and public forum in which those comments were made, right?

 

[Buffalo Brad]

There are other ways to bring the issue up rather than label our AD and the Dal Ward Center a Plantation. He is an epic moron. The conversation, especially in today's world and especially in Boulder, is valid. It is how you go about starting the conversation and he failed miserably. Little man needs to go.

And by the way, he started calling it the front porch for CU once Benson did publically. Before Benson started supporting the AD, he did absolutely nothing to support it as Chancellor. He is mental midget and a horrible representative for the University as a whole. Cannot wait until he is gone one day. I will throw a huge party.

 

[Burrito]

Can we merge the two threads?




Thank you



This is absolutely not true. I can understand why you would think this based on today's statements, but I have had personal conversations with him and can say based on that that he does understand that Athetics is the "front porch of the University [his words].

I can also agree that the criticism of his statements today, and actions in the past are 100% justified, your charactism of him above is wrong.

Are you sure he didn't refer to it as the veranda?

 

[sackman]

We are clear that these weren't Phil's comments, and he was just sharing someone else's thoughts right?

We are clear that Phil wants us to believe they are someone else's thoughts. I wouldn't put it past him to make the whole encounter up in order to make his argument seem more plausible.

 

[Medford M.]

I'm just not easily offended and believe PC anything needs to go away. I'm aware that several people will be wrongly offended by this though.

 

[onealcd]

I'm just not easily offended and believe PC anything needs to go away. I'm aware that several people will be wrongly offended by this though.

I don't really think anyone is offended by this, it was just poor word choice and there was no reason to have this open to the public. Conversations like this with the regents should happen behind closed doors. No one is disagreeing with all of what he says.

 

[Buffenuf]

Plantation? Fine, let those guys who feel that way, sling hash in a sorority and try to make grades without all those tutors and other academic assistance!

 

[hokiehead]

is CU's percentage of black students much different than the state as a whole?

• state: 4% black (source:wiki)
• university: 2.1% (source: CU analytics)

it would be interesting to see how that compares for all state college-bound students, but I'm too lazy. I gave up after spending 5+ minutes digging through CSU and UNC data without success.

In any event, my thought right now is that CU black enrollment is probably not far out of line w/r/t the state demographics. my alma mater has 3.7% black enrollment in a state with 19.4% black population! That is an imbalance, compared to which CU's numbers could easily be considered "in the noise".

I didn't look up the numbers, but I suspect the percent of black athletes at CU (and VT, and most P5 schools) to total student population is indeed a much higher percent, especially on the "revenue sports teams" of FB and men's BB.

so, why do those black athletes at CU feel they are being treated improperly? why do they allegedly go so far as to link their athletic involvement with slavery?

• because they're not paid? well, that's no different than any other school which abides by the NCAA rules.
• because they're treated differently than other students by students? maybe. I'd be interested in hearing some of the AB student members weigh in.
• because they're treated differently than other students by faculty and administration? maybe, I'd be interested in hearing some of the AB faculty members weigh in.
• because many come to CU from states with a higher percent of blacks and they feel like outliers? now I'm spit-balling, but it sounds plausible.

I think these are the types questions that should be asked. Phil should talk to the students and do a root cause analysis. I share the puzzlement of many why he would air it out without gaining that understanding first.

 

[patebuff]

We are clear that Phil wants us to believe they are someone else's thoughts. I wouldn't put it past him to make the whole encounter up in order to make his argument seem more plausible.

If that is the case then CU needs a new Chancellor. Flat out lying about something like this is pretty low, if true.

 

[MtnBuff]

is CU's percentage of black students much different than the state as a whole?

• state: 4% black (source:wiki)
• university: 2.1% (source: CU analytics)

it would be interesting to see how that compares for all state college-bound students, but I'm too lazy. I have up after spending 5+ minutes digging through CU and UNC data without success.

In any event, my thought right now is that CU black enrollment is probably not far out of line w/r/t the state demographics. my alma mater has 3.7% black enrollment in a state with 19.4% black population! That is an imbalance, compared to which CU's numbers could easily be considered "in the noise".

I didn't look up the numbers, but I suspect the percent of black athletes at CU (and VT, and most P5 schools) to total student population is indeed a much higher percent, especially on the "revenue sports teams" of FB and men's BB.

so, why do those black athletes at CU feel they are being treated improperly? why do they allegedly go so far as to link their athletic involvement with slavery?

• because they're not paid? well, that's no different than any other school which abides by the NCAA rules.
• because they're treated differently than other students by students? maybe. I'd be interested in hearing some of the AB student members weigh in.
• because they're treated differently than other students by faculty and administration? maybe, I'd be interested in hearing some of the AB faculty members weigh in.
• because many come to CU from states with a higher percent of blacks and they feel like outliers? now I'm spit-balling, but it sounds plausible.

I think these are the types questions that should be asked. Phil should talk to the students and do a root cause analysis. I share the puzzlement of many why he would air it out without gaining that understanding first.

2.1% vs. 4% is a huge difference when you are realizing that these guys mostly come from neighborhoods where they are used to seeing and talking with black people. Suddenly they go to college and there are virtually no blacks other than those in the athletic department. If you took out the student athletes and your number would be below 1% at many universities in the country. When the only people you see with a similar background are other athletes it is easy to think that you are there for something other than an education.

The problem with Phil's comments are that they make it look like CU-Boulder has a unique problem. The truth is that there is a problem that extends to many colleges and universities. Instead of making CU look bad he could have addressed it in a way that indicates that CU is aware and working to find real solutions.

 

[Deleted member 807]

@Hokie one thing to keep in mind is that >40% of freshmen admissions at CU are from out of state. So the diversity measure for African American admissions might be (60% X 0.04) + (40% X 0.14) to achieve a representative distribution.

I also recall a Xavier Johnson tweet a few years back where he expressed frustration with CU investing in the football facilities when the basketball team shows more success.

An entitled college athlete is going to act entitled.

That said, the Northwestern players that filied suit to get a salary for playing in NCAA athletes are at the forefront of this debate.

CU is navel gazing at this issue, until such time they propose something more substantial than a regents retreat in the mountains with some feel-good dialog that goes nowhere.

 

[absinthe]

is CU's percentage of black students much different than the state as a whole?

• state: 4% black (source:wiki)
• university: 2.1% (source: CU analytics)

it would be interesting to see how that compares for all state college-bound students, but I'm too lazy. I gave up after spending 5+ minutes digging through CSU and UNC data without success.

In any event, my thought right now is that CU black enrollment is probably not far out of line w/r/t the state demographics. my alma mater has 3.7% black enrollment in a state with 19.4% black population! That is an imbalance, compared to which CU's numbers could easily be considered "in the noise".

.

CU has a massive out of state population and and if you expand past black to all non-white the numbers get pretty ugly for CU - right or wrong that is the data. Now if the state would fund the school like it should they might not need to take so many wealthy aka white kids.

 

[sackman]

If that is the case then CU needs a new Chancellor. Flat out lying about something like this is pretty low, if true.

Well, thus far, nobody has taken credit for the quote. I sincerely doubt anybody will, either. So Phil can feel free to quote an unnamed black AD staffer. Nobody is going to ask for the source because to do so would be portrayed as racist. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I'm just saying it wouldn't surprise me if Phil made the whole thing up.

And yes, we need a new Chancellor.

 

[absinthe]

Well, thus far, nobody has taken credit for the quote. I sincerely doubt anybody will, either. So Phil can feel free to quote an unnamed black AD staffer. Nobody is going to ask for the source because to do so would be portrayed as racist. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I'm just saying it wouldn't surprise me if Phil made the whole thing up.

And yes, we need a new Chancellor.

You need to lay of the delusion and blind hatred in your life, this 100% happens.

we do however need a new chancellor - been there too long.

We had athletes calling Josh Scott too white and getting in fist fights with him - its a thing deal with it.

 

[sackman]

You need to lay of the delusion and blind hatred in your life, this 100% happens.

we do however need a new chancellor - been there too long.

We had athletes calling Josh Scott too white and getting in fist fights with him - its a thing deal with it.

I'm happy in my delusions.

Part of going to college is learning how to exist in an unfamiliar environment with unfamiliar people from different backgrounds. The appropriate response to the "Plantation" quote is to look around and take a close look at the world. The AD is a microcosm of the society we live in.There's no fixing that. That's life. The sooner we figure that out, the better off we will all be.

 

[absinthe]

I'm happy in my delusions.

Part of going to college is learning how to exist in an unfamiliar environment with unfamiliar people from different backgrounds. The appropriate response to the "Plantation" quote is to look around and take a close look at the world. The AD is a microcosm of the society we live in.There's no fixing that. That's life. The sooner we figure that out, the better off we will all be.

you should re-read that and think about it.

 

[sackman]

you should re-read that and think about it.

Think about what? This entire debate is absurd.
What are we supposed to do about it? Get rid of a bunch of sports? Get rid of the athletic department? Pay football players, but not other student athletes? Honestly, what's the solution to this whole "plantation" problem of ours?

Right now, the AD provides dozens of scholarships for Black athletes. What more are they supposed to be doing? What more can they do within the confines of NCAA regulations?

Maybe we are just supposed to all feel really guilty. Is that it? Keep providing the free schooling, room and board, etc., but feel guilty about it.

 

[absinthe]

I don't have the words.

 

[El Gringo]

About that Front Porch thing; Supporting the CUAD as a marketing tool for the university is different than being a sports fan.

In this context, what is the difference? Uncle Phil and I spoke about CU being competitive in football and basketball, which he described as being the "veranda" (BP's words, not mine) of the University. Does it matter if he has broken 3 TV remotes (like me, thanks to the crappy teams CU has fielded) as long as he wants them to win?

MTN's statment was that DiSteph wants to get rid of sport. that is not true.

So in what way is CU-Boulder better off because of Dr. Phil.

He is very good at giving lip service when it serves his purpose but he has been terrible for CU football. Outside of athletics tell me which academic area has increased in national stature due to his efforts, has our faculty overall improved, has our national reputation advanced? I don't see it. He has been in office long enough that regular followers of the school should be able to identify accomplishments that he has had a significant hand in. What are those.

I was responding to your statement that Phil hates athletics and wants football gone. and you respond with questions and statements totally off point.

I don't disagree many of his actions, aside from hiring RMFG and working behind the scenes to get the financing for the new facilities (I know, that was all benson and george), have not been great for CU football. Did you know that he was the AD faculty liaison in the early '90s before being appointed chancelor? That requires someone to have an appreciation for (if not be a fan of) sports. As a regular follower of the school like yourself, surely you can appreciate the CEC improvements, the C4C construction, and the development of the East Campus (all without state funding). If you have not seen it, you need to open your eyes.

I am not defending Phil's actions today, but your statements are simply wild conjecture. Take a deep breath.

 

[sackman]

Hey. If we want to have the discussion, have the discussion. What's the solution? So we have staffers and athletes genuinely upset that the football program foots the bill for a bunch of mostly white sports? Theyre upset because the AD makes money from their efforts? I don't see a lot of actual solutions to that problem, but I'm open to suggestions.

 

[Deleted member 807]

In this context, what is the difference? Uncle Phil and I spoke about CU being competitive in football and basketball, which he described as being the "veranda" (BP's words, not mine) of the University. Does it matter if he has broken 3 TV remotes (like me, thanks to the crappy teams CU has fielded) as long as he wants them to win?

Gordon Gee was a fan of football and it showed. His enthusiasm for football manifested inself into a national championship. Same story with David Boren at OU.

From my observations of Phil, he treats athletics as a "nice to have" instead of a "have to have." We will never hear Phil state "my legacy at CU is not complete until CU wins at the Rose Bowl". That just isn't who he is.

The "front porch of the university" quip had not been part of Phil's list of talking points before 2012. It wasn't until CU football hit rock bottom and pressure from CU boosters boiled over that Phil changed his tune...whereby he picked up that porch line from Benson.

So, yes, it matters whether or not Phil supports the CUAD as a marketing gimmick versus a source of pride that keeps him up at night.

 

[TimmyDUBs]

Foot, meet bullet.

CU doing everything to ruin a potentially great program

 

[DBT]

The tennis team is going to be pissed!

 

[Gary Indiana]

This whole thread needs to be destroyed.