Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="mrl2016, post: 2659961, member: 8512"] I hear what you're saying, and the hockey team is a strong example for the point you're trying to make, but I still respectfully disagree. Susan has one job, to make the University into the best school it can be. Is the University in a better place than when she arrived in 2010? When you look at the statistics of the average accepted student the answer is clearly yes. You think that's from "unsustainable" spending- I get that. Blame the Connecticut policy makers for giving her the money. Don't blame her for putting the University in a better place because she spent the money she was given... What did you expect her to do, save it so she could bail out the state? That's not her job. Her responsibility is to the University. If you disagree with the states decision to invest so heavily in the University that's fair but it has no bearing on whether she is an effective President... if I had to pick between a President who spends the money & doesn't improve the quality of the University or one who spends the money and does improve the quality of the University I'm picking the latter (that's Susan). If the "unsustainable" levels of investment go away chances it hurts the level of applicant UConn receives are slim to none in the short term. The seniors applying don't give a damn about what the school is spending in the future they just know what the campus looks like when they show up for their tour. The new STEM building isn't going to disappear & the Seniors aren't going to lose the perception of UConn as a more competitive school. It's this cyclical perception which has been driving better applicants, which in turn drives better employment recruiting, which makes better students apply. TLDR: if you don't like spending blame CT lawmakers, not the President whose turned the school into a better University because of that spending [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach