2008 Woodie Awards
Never enough excuses to avoid cost
Issue date: 1/31/08
Section: Letters to the Editor
I'm writing in regards to Mike Norton's letter to the editor from the 1/29 Voices section of the Reporter. I feel compelled to disagree with pretty much everything he had to say. I'm going to guess Mr. Norton participated in little to no outdoor rec activities during his tenure at MSU.
In regards to safety, take a walk on one the flag football fields sometime. Besides being 5 yards too narrow due to lack of space and having a gopher hole or five, you'll find yourself descending into a valley around the midfield mark. Not good enough? How would you like to be standing in right field of one of the softball fields when Tommy Tough Nuts on the field behind you scorches a line drive that can reach your head in a matter of seconds? These aren't made up conditions and situations. They exist and are completely unsafe.
Regarding his comment about "improvements to athletic fields at no cost to the athletic department," it's also no cost to students. Lights for the baseball and softball fields and relamping for the football fields are set aside pending future university, private, and community funding.
Since the main issue overall is cost, it's important to keep in mind that the dent to student fees will likely be smaller than many people think and it will carry out over a longer period of time than people realize.
Also, in terms of funding, Mr. Norton suggested that Campus Rec should use some of the $300k plus awarded to them from student money to repair outdoor rec fields. 85% of that money alone goes to professional staff and student wages. This isn't even including supplies and equipment for facilities and intramural sports which usually costs around $40,000 a year.
The part of Mr. Norton's argument that seems so frequent among others as well is the "students won't see the full benefit before they graduate so why should they pay for it" argument. I don't see anything wrong with paving the road for future MSU students and giving back to a university that has offered us a lot in return.
If someone chooses not to take advantage of the abundant number of programs offered then it's their own loss. Current and future students shouldn't be penalized because a greedy population wanted to save $30 a semester in student fees.
Over 60% of the student population uses Campus Recreation facilities annually. Since Otto Rec Center, Myers Field House and Taylor Center have been renovated and built, they have become main focal points in the attractive facilities MSU offers to prospective students.
Extra curricular opportunities offer a constructive way for students to spend their time outside of class, working, and studying. They deserve to have adequate and safe facilities to take advantage of these opportunities and I strongly encourage people to keep that in mind when the time comes to take a stand on the updated Outdoor Rec and Fitness plan.
Jake Reuvers, MSU senior
In regards to safety, take a walk on one the flag football fields sometime. Besides being 5 yards too narrow due to lack of space and having a gopher hole or five, you'll find yourself descending into a valley around the midfield mark. Not good enough? How would you like to be standing in right field of one of the softball fields when Tommy Tough Nuts on the field behind you scorches a line drive that can reach your head in a matter of seconds? These aren't made up conditions and situations. They exist and are completely unsafe.
Regarding his comment about "improvements to athletic fields at no cost to the athletic department," it's also no cost to students. Lights for the baseball and softball fields and relamping for the football fields are set aside pending future university, private, and community funding.
Since the main issue overall is cost, it's important to keep in mind that the dent to student fees will likely be smaller than many people think and it will carry out over a longer period of time than people realize.
Also, in terms of funding, Mr. Norton suggested that Campus Rec should use some of the $300k plus awarded to them from student money to repair outdoor rec fields. 85% of that money alone goes to professional staff and student wages. This isn't even including supplies and equipment for facilities and intramural sports which usually costs around $40,000 a year.
The part of Mr. Norton's argument that seems so frequent among others as well is the "students won't see the full benefit before they graduate so why should they pay for it" argument. I don't see anything wrong with paving the road for future MSU students and giving back to a university that has offered us a lot in return.
If someone chooses not to take advantage of the abundant number of programs offered then it's their own loss. Current and future students shouldn't be penalized because a greedy population wanted to save $30 a semester in student fees.
Over 60% of the student population uses Campus Recreation facilities annually. Since Otto Rec Center, Myers Field House and Taylor Center have been renovated and built, they have become main focal points in the attractive facilities MSU offers to prospective students.
Extra curricular opportunities offer a constructive way for students to spend their time outside of class, working, and studying. They deserve to have adequate and safe facilities to take advantage of these opportunities and I strongly encourage people to keep that in mind when the time comes to take a stand on the updated Outdoor Rec and Fitness plan.
Jake Reuvers, MSU senior
Be the first to comment on this story