Outside The Lines did an interesting piece this morning on Phil Knight (founder of Nike) controlling the Oregon University Athletic Department.  While the influence and power of boosters is certainly not news to anyone who follows US college sports, it does bring up an important dialogue that needs to take place. 

I'm not sure I know what the answer is - but the logic for why this occurs is pretty straightforward:
- Universities want money
- Because they want money, they compete for donors (against other institutions)
- Because they compete for donors, they often give up certain powers within their own organizations as conditions to receive these donations

As long as this structure for funding universities is in place, nothing will change.  If people really want things to change, it seems to me that we should be talking about changing this fundamental funding structure.  Hoping that people will "do the right thing", when the incentives for those involved are completely misaligned, will never work.

A couple of additional thoughts worth mentioning:

1. The importance of tenure at our universities - without tenure, there would be no dissenting faculty voice on debates like this.  No matter how you feel about the issue at hand, it's hard to argue against the importance of giving faculty the ability to speak up without fear of losing their jobs.

2. Why does Phil Knight wear sunglasses at all times?  Isn't it the media's responsibility to root out important issues such as these?  But seriously, no man should be able to wear sunglasses in a posed, professional, indoor picture unless they are blind, recently had eye surgery, or lost an eye working in a factory.  That's the rule.  If any of these turn out to be true about Mr. Knight, then I preemptively apologize at this time.  Until we know otherwise, I apologize for nothing, and demand to know the answer! 

On second thought, keep the sunglasses on!