Date: Nov. 2nd ‘06
FOOTBALL PASSION DIES HARD /
PERSONALLY SUBJECTIVELY SKEWERED BY
THE KU DRIVE-BY SCRIBBLERS
AND THEIR SURROGATES AT THE EAGLE
RESPONSE TO EAGLE ARTICLE SUNDAY OCTOBER 8TH 2006, FROM: alumnishockerblackandgolds.com
COMES NOW the Shocker Black & Golds and hereby respond in substance to the keening and wailing, albeit in places somewhat subtle, of the Eagle scribblers:
I. Introduction
I take it as a badge of honor to be skewered by the Eagle. They are the anthesis of reasoned analysis based upon true facts. Their expertise is based upon subjective opinion, which bent is only defensible based upon the right of free speech. But God forbid any of us common rabble should have a free speech opinion based upon and expressed by way of documented facts. There is hell to pay if you should disagree with the subjective infinite wisdom of the Eagle. They publically personally attack common citizens, who are not public figures, who have the audacity to criticize the Eagle’s political drive-by renderings, that are clearly detrimental to the public good.
Perhaps that is why their circulation has continued to dwindled to 90,000 on weekdays and 145,000 on Sundays. With 462,896 folks in the county, and over 600,000 in the Wichita metro area, less than 1 in about 7 take the Eagle weekly, and many of the 145,000 that take the Sunday Eagle, it is submitted, do so only for the weekend shopping adds and the TV schedule, ignoring the Eagle’s liberal canted national lemming version of the news.
I believe it is truly politically correct, to not be politically correct. Speak out and say what it is you mean based upon reasoned analysis of true facts. But be prepared to be personally subjectively attacked, if you should disagree with the scribblers for the Eagle, or the establishment power structure.
However, not many liberals are willing to admit they are a liberal. Liberals believe in the right to free speech, unlimited by any concept of yelling fire in a crowded theater, as long as it applies to their lemming ideology. But for other folks who have views different from theirs, no matter how factually supported, if they don’t like what you say, then you can’t say it. It’s the ≈1795-1800 Alien and Sedition Acts all over again, defined as saying what people in power don’t want to hear – put to bed over 200 years ago – and now a majority of four: Sue Schlapp, Paul Gray, Carl Brewer, and Bob Martz, knee jerk president Beggs supporters on the City Council; pass a city ordinance – in probability, at president Beggs or his surrogates’ request – precisely equivalent to the Alien and Sedition Acts, saying you can’t say it, and no future city council can ever again discuss the issue. That the opinions are factually supported with true facts, is irrelevant to these folks, as they turn on their own subjective opinions upon ipse dixit authority, and their positions of power.
II. THAT FOOTBALL OR FOOTBALL PASSION
IS DEAD OR IS IN THE PROCESS OF DYING HARD
IS WISHFUL THINKING AND VASTLY OVERSTATED
Paraphrasing Samuel Clemens, the Eagle report of football’s demise is vastly overstated. The very title of the Eagle article gives away the bent of the Eagle. The KU scribblers at the Eagle want football to go away, of course: not all football, not football at KU, or K-State, Pittsburg State, Emporia State, Fort Hays State, or any of some 18 Junior Colleges in the state; but only football at WSU. And as for Cowley County, the only Junior College in the state without football, the Eagle is all for its return, but not for WSU.
Why is it do you suspect that the Eagle has to continually put down football at WSU only, while they support reinstating football for Cowley County? We are 10 years plus down the road, and the issue of football hasn’t died. The Eagle has 55 gallon barrels of ink and a dwindling circulation of 90,000; president Beggs now on their side – president Hughes in the end was publically for the return of football at WSU saying on TV when he announced the renovation of the stadium, that: “I’m appointing a committee to study football and will bring back football at whatever level the community will support”. They have on their side the control of the City Council through the president’s golf buddy and knee jerk supporters on the City Council (Note: The president now advises that he has no more time for golf. Perhaps now he can find time to write his first documented position paper on the return of football.); and the apparent political agreement between the president and the County Commission; but the KU scribblers at the Eagle just can’t seem to kill the issue no matter how hard they try.
Apparently, the issue has its own obvious common sense self sustaining merit in the community, independent of any support provided by the Shocker Black & Golds.
We only have a circulation of about 150 community leaders. The KU scribblers have a 1000 times more circulation, all the money they need (our little group has to pass the hat amongst the group for the costs to copy and to distribute our position paper information; its truly David vs Goliath and we don’t even have a sling shot. But we do have reason, truth, and the facts on our side, and they will still be there whether or not we say another word). The Eagle’s scribblers have the newspaper’s money and apparatus to distribute their bigoted view with; but they just can’t sell the issue, any more than they can substantively increase their circulation. It is the Eagle KU scribblers, that are tilting against the metaphoric windmill, while they continue to squander their employer Eagle’s dwindling circulation, instead of championing the issue to the benefit of the University (as opposed to president Beggs) and the community, and perhaps by the process, increasing their circulation. The Eagle was on the wrong side of history when they tried to tear down our Cessna stadium, and they are on the wrong side of history now.
As an interesting comparison, the Monday August 28th 2006 Colorado Springs Gazette contains a 13 page sports section. Two weeks later, the Monday October 9th Wichita Eagle contained a 5 page sports section. How long has it been since the Eagle has had a 13 page Monday sports section, in a city with a population of 355,000 compared to Colorado Springs’ population of 370,000 as per the 2006 Rand McNally Road Atlas.
While the Eagle’s circulation problem is only a related issue, we submit the fundamental problem is that many folks in this community do not agree with the Eagle’s writers’ liberal views, don’t care to be spoon feed liberalise ideologue, and simply determine not to pay them for the unwanted gabble. And it is issues like the KU scribblers opposition to WSU football, that turn the community off.
They have the president standing in his little patch of sovereignty with outcome determinative power to block the return of football; and the present majority control of the City and County political authorities; but for ten years they haven’t been able to win the issue. They are left to personally subjectively attack falsely as Don Quixote, a common rabble single member of the community pleading the case for a dozen or so common citizens seeking justice from the establishment. But all power is fleeting; including newspapers, presidents, City Council members, and County Commission members.
For example, the next president of WSU will not be selected by KU alums, as was president Beggs; thanks to the Shocker Black & Golds two year effort to write the language and campaign a bill through the legislature to de-pack the then KU monopolistic controlled Board of regents, which came to fruition a year after president Beggs was given – we submit – the condition of no football at WSU by KU folks, and the requirement that he not seek capital improvement money from the state board of regents’ budget, but rather rely upon the mill levy for capital improvements; and upon apparent agreement, the position of president of WSU. But the Eagle doesn’t mention writing statute language and getting it passed through the legislature to depack the then KU controlled Board of Regents, as it wouldn’t fit their “conspiracy” theory, nor would it be compatible with their tilting at windmills Don Quixote assassination.
As an additional example, Sue Schlapp, who advised this writer, as well as publically announced at a City Council meeting, that she was “comfortable” with what president Beggs that told her (whatever that was) about the use of the mill levy moneys, although unable to explain multiple uses of the moneys, is up for reelection next spring. Bob Martz, the president’s golf buddy, is term limited. Paul Gray, also a student at WSU, ostensively impliedly subject to president Beggs’ potential negative influence upon his grades, is up for reelection next spring. With Bob Martz’ term limitation; should us common rabble voters determine to relieve my representative Sue Schlapp (“You just better be careful what you say!”, repeated three additional times in a threatening manner; and scolding me for having the audacity to express an opinion to my representative contra to her own – thereby earning and entitling me to the label T-Rex Sue) (It’s America T-Rex Sue, and we’re entitled to express our opinions to our representatives; and if not, to change the representatives) and Paul Gray from their strident knee jerk president Beggs support positions on the City Council, and replace them with independent reasoned leadership; president Beggs may suddenly find himself without control of the City Council. (We would ask that you give this issue serious thought, and discuss the issue with your friends in the community).
Perhaps because of this possibility of losing his control of the City Council on the mill levy issue, we are led to believe by rumors from supporters of Professor Joe Pisciotte, that president Beggs has asked him to run against Mayor Mayans next spring, as Mr. Pisciotte advises supporters from whom he is seeking advice as to their willingness to contribute to his campaign, should he determine to run against Carlos Mayans. (We note professor Pisciotte has now announced he will not do so).
Apparently, the president doesn’t have enough to do in his little patch of sovereignty, and needs to politically intrigue against Mayor Mayans, in the hope of replacing him. Of course, if his guy Joe Pisciotte had become Mayor, president Beggs would unlikely have been asked any questions about his expenditures of mill levy moneys. But councilman Brewer has now announced, and will fill that need nicely, should he be elected mayor, as evidenced by his past knee jerk support of president Beggs and his erroneous unquestioned spoon fed belief that the Board of Regents had any jurisdiction or authority over the decision to return football or not, expressed in open City Council meeting.
The audacity of the Mayor to want to know how, for example, the contingency mill levy moneys, some $500,000, or the asserted contingency land acquisition moneys, $900,000 a year, are spent; and to suggest that the City help the university solve its 20 year old loss of traditional student problem, to the benefit of the university and community, is apparently unacceptable.
And the City Manager, refuses to request a specific accounting of portions of the mill levy moneys from president Beggs or the university. It’s apparently not the Mayor’s business to look after our mill levy tax moneys, “It’s my money” said president Beggs to three tax paying members of our Shocker Black & Golds in our last meeting in October of 2005. And he’s vindictive about it. He will seek to replace the Mayor; and his KU scribbler soul mates on the issue at the Eagle, will subjectively personally attack a common citizen who is not a public figure or public authority, for speaking out on an issue of loss of traditional students at his alma mater, and the cause of that loss, the suspension of football in 1986.
The loss of traditional student problem, unmeritoriously caused by the then KU controlled Board of Regents determination to suspend football at WSU, has not gone away for 20 years, and will not go away no matter how much president Beggs tries to buy students with our mill levy money; even if the Shocker Black & Golds should never say another word about the issue. I’m not the issue, and neither is our group the issue. And, by attacking me personally, and not substantively dealing with the loss of traditional student issue, it is the Eagle that is truly Don Quixote tilting at windmills.
III. THE EAGLE’S APPROACH
FOR THE ARTICLE
Sometime about two weeks prior to the targeted date of Sunday October 1st ‘06, for the article’s publication, Eagle sports writer assigned to WSU, Paul Suellentrop, called this writer, Fred Marrs, and announced he was writing an article focused on the Shocker Black & Golds generally, and me specifically. I responded that I was not the issue and neither was our group the issue, but that if he would focus the article on a reasoned debate on the issue of the return of football to WSU, I would provide him probably with more facts and information than he could accommodate in his article. He advised that he had been assigned the topic, and that I had to be the primary focus of the article along with the Black and Golds. I then ask him to revisit the issue with the managers of the editorial board and see if they would allow the focus of the article to be on the return of football at WSU, and he agreed to would talk it over with them. I took it from this first discussion, that Suellentrop was just doing his job as assigned by the KU scribblers on the editorial board.
The second time Suellentrop called, no change in the focus of his article and inquiry had occurred. It was clear that the editorial board was requiring the focus of the article be on me specifically, and our group generally. I continued to advise him that I did not want to be the focus of the article, and that neither I nor our group was the issue, but I in any case, off the record, diplomatically discussed the loss of traditional students as a result of the Board of Regents suspension of our football program in 1986, at the time WSU was 442 students less than K-State, who was bleeding students precipitously and we were continuing to gain students; and that now we were down some 9000 students to K-State thanks to the Board of Regents hiring president Wefald in 1986 and instructing him to stop the bleeding of students and to emphasis football, while suspending football at WSU, as subsequently advised to this writer by Sondra Macmillan, then the chairman of the Board of Regents.
Suellentrop asked for names of other people in our group and I gave him names and phone numbers of folks until he said he had enough.
I believe the third time Suellentrop called, he asked to set up a date for our group to have our picture taken in Cessna Stadium. I continued to tell him we were not the issue. I asked him if I could review a draft of his article, prior to determining whether or not to agree to provide him a group picture. He refused, saying it was not the papers policy. I said I wasn’t asking to edit the article, only to read a draft to determine if we wanted to support his article with our picture. We obviously did not want to provide him a picture if the article was going to be negative for our purposes, and I advised that we had no past tract record of the Eagle substantively dealing with the issues, or being other than negative to the return of football at WSU. I did however say that I would contact our people and see what the group thought about it. I also diplomatically talked to him, off the record on background, about various associated issues with the mill levy and the return of football, as unlike the university, we have nothing to hide.
The fourth time Suellentrop called, he said to confirm the picture date and time, I advised him our group had voted unanimously, except for two I had not been able to contact, not to submit to a picture, as we felt his intent was to write a negative article that we did not want to support. I told him I did not want to be the focus of the article, and the only thing I would say for his article was the quote I then gave him that appeared in the article.
The fifth time Suellentrop called, I immediately told him again, rather strongly, that I did not want to be the focus of his article. He said he just wanted to confirm a few facts and asked if I had graduated twice from WSU and from KU law school. I said yes. He then asked if I was 65, and I advised him no I’m 64. He then asked another personal question and I told him I was not the issue and thanked him and hung up in his ear.
That night at dinner time, Suellentrop rang my door bell and when I went to the door, he advised who he was and asked if I was Fred Marrs. I said yes, and, I noted, he reached for the screen door handle to opened the screen door, without being invited in. Because my office is in the process of remodeling, my entire office furniture, desks, legal filing cabinets, computer, copier, etc., including 23 legal boxes of files stacked in my dinning room, with my living room and dinning room totally packed with only enough room to walk through; I immediately apologized for the mess, as I was embarrassed at the obvious abnormal condition. Because the filing cabinets are large and can not be moved without removing all the files, I pointed to the 23 boxes in my dinning room and advised they were mostly legal research files of issues I had researched and written on over some 32 years of practicing law, but there was one box in my living room that contained extra copies of documents I had drafted relating to the WSU loss of traditional student/return of football issue. I took him back to my office and showed him my empty office in the process of remodeling. We had a cordial discussion off the record, and in the end I wondered what he thought he was accomplishing coming uninvited to my house, but thought that perhaps it was just his way of apologizing for his continued harassment, notwithstanding my advice. When by nature you try to give folks the benefit of the doubt, it’s hard to anticipate the degree of harassment some folks will go to assassinate you.
Meet Paul Suellentrop, designated assassin of the drive-by KU scribblers at the Eagle.
So there you have it. The Eagle has prattled, and we common
rabble should all just go away and let the Eagle carry president Beggs’ water for him, and listen to the Eagle’s knee jerk KU scribblers rule on the issue, contra to the best interests of the community and our university; just like the Eagle, on the wrong side of history, editorially supported the KU controlled Board of Regents attempt to tear down Cessna Stadium in 1995.
IV. Specific Response to the Eagle Article
Please note the week delay in publishing the Eagle’s article due to the Stones Concert. Initially Suellentrop advised the article would appear in the Sunday October 1st Eagle. On Saturday the day before the 1st, Suellentrop called and left a message that some “circumstances” had come up, and they would be delaying the article one week until the 8th of October, when the article was in fact published.
The circumstances were that the Rolling Stones concert was Sunday night October 1st, and it wouldn’t do to try to paint me as, and contend that I was Don Quixote, tilting at windmills, when the Stones concert being held that very day in a stadium that wouldn’t have existed, but for our tilting at windmills 10 years earlier. And, one of the windmills was, the Eagle trying to get the stadium torn down, along with the then KU Board of Regents. No, they couldn’t plead that case, so they waited a week. Which fact tells you just how intelligent the Eagle thinks us common citizens are. All they have to do is wait a week, and we will never connect the two events. It truly is the Eagle’s intelligence that is in question.
The other circumstance was the fact that someone – who the Shocker Black & Golds would personally like to hereby thank, as we know not who it was – bought an expensive add for the Sunday October 1st Eagle on the facing page to the articles on the Stones, thanking the Black & Golds for saving Cessna Stadium, but for such tilting at windmills, the community could not have enjoy the Stones concert. It just wouldn’t do to run the add thanking the Black & Golds for saving the stadium, at the same time the Eagle was trying to plead their Don Quixote assassination. And, the Eagle needs the add money, given their KU scribblers’ dissipation of the Eagle’s circulation, by incessantly pleading their own ideologue, contrary to the vast majority of the community, who eventually vote against their efforts by refusing to pay the Eagle for the privilege of being spoon feed the scribblers personal liberal gabble. (Note: Readers interested in the national liberal lemming virus subject might want to read: “Arrogance, Rescuing America from the Media Elite”, by Bernard Goldberg)
So that the reader can easily identify the specific responses, the following will present the article statement followed by our response:
1. “Better yet, picture Don Quixote in a football helmet passionately writing a 25 page report detailing the benefits of football to WSU and Wichita.”
Picture if you would, Paul Suellentrop in his scribbler uniform, toadying up to his KU Scribbler superiors on the Editorial Board, using his professional paid for pen to Don Quixote character assassinate an unpaid common citizen for the sin of having the audacity of stating opinions contra to the infinite wisdom of the KU scribblers on the Eagle Editorial Board.
Specifically please note the reference to the “25 page report”. Suellentrop specifically advised that he had reviewed our documents on our Web site. The 25 page report he refers to, was not at the time of his article, posted on our Web site, but it is now. The title of the analysis was “The Empirical Effects of Collegiate Athletics: An Interim Report Additional Comments”, dated 26 August ‘04. The reason for the title “Additional Comments”, for this 25 page analysis, was because it followed a previous initial analysis of 7 pages, dated 16 August ‘04. The analysis was of an NCAA funded independent study commissioned by the NCAA, entitled “The Empirical Effects of Collegiate Athletics: An Interim Report”. This NCAA commissioned independent report was based upon the latest 8 years of NCAA data for the 117 Division I-A universities, which data was provided to the report writers for their study by the NCAA staff. There could be no more accurate data available for any study.
In a Black & Golds meeting with president Beggs, he gave me the 52 page NCAA commissioned report, and ask me to review it and provide him my analysis of the report. It took approximately 8 hours to read the report, analyze the report, and draft and mail an initial 7 page analysis to president Beggs. I say initial analysis response, for the reason that upon review of the NCAA report, it was clear that the report found as one of its substantive conclusions, that:
There was a direct measurable relationship between the dropping of football, and the loss of students.
I advised president Beggs, that I did not need a full analysis of the report to answer the question he put, of whether there was a relationship between the suspension of football and the loss of students, as that finding was clearly in the report, but that I would as time permit, follow up with a general analysis:
“I have said this is a partial conclusion, for the reason that I have carefully read the entire report, and have other comments. They are however not necessary for the analysis relating to our question presented. There are additional comments that indirectly support my position and conclusions I have drawn, that I will try to present in a follow on general analysis of various aspects of the report.”
Ten days later I provided the 25 page general analysis to president Beggs. These two reports were accomplished at the request of president Beggs in August of 2004, and were not generally circulated to the community.
On January 19th ‘06, Mayor Mayans announced at a Chamber sunrise scrambler that he believed it was now time to bring back football at WSU for the benefit of the university and the community, and that he would do what he could to help. This policy statement by the Mayor was news, but notwithstanding, the Eagle failed to report the statement as news, for the reason that the KU scribblers disagreed with it. Not until ten days later, did KU scribbler for the Eagle’s Editorial Board, Editorial Writer Randy Scholfield write his “Punt” article stating the KU scribblers opposition for the Eagle, to the Mayor and the return of football to WSU.
I believe sometime subsequent to the Mayor’s policy statement, and prior to his “Punt” article, Randy Scholfield called this writer, and among other things, asked did I have the NCAA study concerning the relationship between the dropping of football and the loss of students. I advised I did, but that I only had one copy and that it was marked up. He asked if I would provide him with a copy of the NCAA study and my analysis of the NCAA study. I agreed, and hand carried copies of the NCAA study and my two analysis, to the Eagle and personally handed them to Scholfield, and had a short discussion with him at the time concerning the issue and merits of the return of football to WSU. During the discussion he advised that Phillip Brownlee, Opinion Editor for the Editorial Board, was also a KU graduate, although I have not confirmed that fact with Brownlee. Subsequently, Scholfield published his “Punt” article.
When we set up our Web site, I only posted the initial 7 page analysis, not the follow on general 25 page analysis, until after the Oct. 8th ‘06 Suellentrop article “Football Passion Dies Hard”.
Accordingly, there just is no question, but that Suellentrop had the 25 page analysis, and that it was provided to him by Randy Scholfield, prior to his Oct. 8th article, as that is the only place he could have obtained it from, other than president Beggs, who would have had no interest in providing Suellentrop evidence contrary to his position.
Notwithstanding having knowledge of the NCAA data and independently commissioned report, including the additional Goff 2000 report with the same finding – that there was a direct measurable (defended as supported by factual data) relationship between the suspension of football and the resultant loss of students – Suellentrop was required to go to Denver Colorado, probably at the advice of president Beggs, to find Rob Baird and report in his article:
“Rob Baird, associate vice president for Denver-based education consultants Noel-Levitz, said he’s not aware of studies that indicate football equals enrollment growth.”
Please note how Baird carefully doesn’t say:
“he’s not aware of studies that indicate suspension of football equals loss of enrollment.”
President Beggs, in my limited experience, has exhibited his respect for Kansas straightforwardness is not highly developed, but his knowledge of political intrigue more than makes up for it, and is unsurpassed. And there is just no question that he is a professional director of other folks to provide information that he wants, and that he doesn’t dare present himself. And, by the way, where is it do you suspect is the first position paper of president Beggs, citing documented facts and making reasoned deductive arguments, flowing from the documented facts? Don’t hold your breath, as you will never see one. Nor can president Beggs position be supported by the process of deductive arguments flowing from documented facts. We welcome the first such effort by president Beggs, so as to provide a reasoned response based upon true facts, so that the community can properly debate and decide the issue of loss of traditional students and the return of football for WSU.
Moreover, Suellentrop was, in my view, in the process of presenting the quotation of Rob Baird, intellectually dishonest as he personally knew he was misleading the public with Baird’s statement, as he had been provided the NCAA study and admits he had reviewed our general 25 page analysis accomplished for president Beggs, that specifically analyzed the NCAA commissioned study and identified the additional Goff 2000 report, both of which found a direct measurable relationship between dropping football and the subsequent loss of students. Not only was Suellentrop intellectually dishonest about this issue, but he additionally in my opinion, violated in part the professional Journalists Code of Ethics in the process. As stated by the Journalists Code of Ethics:
“THE SOCIETY of Professional Journalists, Sigma Delta Chi believes the duty of journalists is to serve the truth. ...
“WE BELIEVE in public enlightenment as the forerunner of justice and in our Constitutional role to seek the truth as part of the public’s right to know the truth.
WE BELIEVE those responsibilities carry obligations that require journalists to perform with intelligence, objectivity, accuracy and fairness. ....
“RESPONSIBILITY: ... Journalists who use their professional status as representatives of the public for selfish or other unworthy motives violate a high trust. ....
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS: ... It carries with it the freedom and the responsibility to discuss, question and challenge actions and utterances of our government and of our public and private institutions. ....
“ACCURACY AND OBJECTIVITY: Good faith with the public is the foundation of all worthy journalism.
1. Truth is our ultimate goal.
2. Objectively in reporting the news is another goal ...
3. There is no excuse for inaccuracies or lack of thoroughness....
6. Partisanship in editorial comment that knowingly departs from the truth violates the spirit of American journalism. ...
8. Special articles or presentations devoted to advocacy or the writer’s own conclusions and interpretations should be labeled as such. ....
FAIR PLAY: ...
4. It is the duty of news media to make prompt and complete correction of their errors.”
Why is it do you suspect Suellentrop would hide the truth from the public? The answer is: the fact that the most data accurate, and definitive NCAA commissioned study, and the Goff 2000 study, existed precisely contra to president Beggs position, and could not be presented to the public by the KU scribbler water carriers for president Beggs. For this intentional misrepresentation alone, Suellentrop and his KU scribbler superiors’ personal opinions, should be given no weight whatsoever. They have forfeited their credibility, and exhibited their not so hidden bigoted agenda and desire to preclude football at WSU only, and have plead their case intellectually dishonestly, with questionably generated opinion.
2. “He argues the university and community desperately need football, homecoming and marching band again – like every other Board of Regents university in Kansas. He Blasts almost everyone who is not in agreement and labels them part of a University of Kansas-led conspiracy to keep WSU down.”
The designated assassin conveniently misstates many issues. We have never used the word “desperately”, in the context of the rationale of our arguments. We have argued that the loss of football in 1986, is the precise cause of the loss of traditional students at WSU, and that if we are to ever recover from this unjust damage caused to our university, we need to become a traditional university once again – as we were when we came into the state system – with a traditional football program. And, there is no doubt, that the KU folks controlling both the selection committees for our president, and the Board of Regents making the final decision, determined the suspension of our football program in 1986. We have plead that case with factual examples, none of which have ever been denied publically.
Please note the pejorative use of words: desperately, blasts, labels, and conspiracy, by which the reader is to understand that the designated assassin is writing about bad unmeritorious acts, without having the substance to cite a specific issue and explain the specific alleged wrongdoing. We are all to know it’s just wrongdoing, because he says so.
On the other hand, when we criticize someone, we are criticizing what they say and do, and we either give factual examples, or are prepared to give factual examples that exist. We do not just subjectively attack, as does the designated Eagle assassin.
I suppose, because we are not paid as is the Eagle designated assassin, it may be fair to say we are passionate about trying to correct unquestionable wrongdoing accomplished against our alma mater university. Suellentrop is paid to disagrees with the Black & Golds generally, and me personally, with 55 gallon barrels of ink and 1000 times more circulation than our circulation of 150 community leaders, and he “labels” me Don Quixote, at the same time he is “blasting” me for allegedly “labeling” “almost everyone” as part of a KU led “conspiracy”. His assertion is false. No where can the paid designated assassin find a single sentence in the thousands of pages I have written in the last 10 years on the issues, whereby I asserted a “conspiracy” or even used the word “conspiracy”. It didn’t happen.
They feel guilty as they pretend it has to be a conspiracy, rather than just the exercise of raw power of office and passionate KU alumni support against WSU football, viewed as not in the best interest of KU football, KU obtaining traditional students from the Wichita area, and KU precluding WSU from any moneys on the State Capital Improvement Budget, to maximize state moneys for KU.
There is no doubt that the KU folks have their alma mater’s interest always at the forefront. No one would doubt that, not even the KU folks. There is also no doubt that the KU folks have viewed WSU as not being in the best interest of KU, as early on documented by the WSU published little hard back black book on the struggle to get WSU into the state system, titled: “An Act Of Faith”.
Moreover, we have documented factually every example that we have presented of KU folks improperly damaging WSU by the use of their positions of power, including the KU monopolistic control of the Board of Regents, and the Boards decisions, prior to our successful two year “tilting at windmills” effort to pass a law to legally depack the Board of Regents.
Suellentrop can not factually respond to any one of these specific issues, as they are true and documented, so he generally drives by and gratuitously subjectively asserts, without any evidence whatsoever, that we are alleging a KU conspiracy, when all we accomplished was to factually document incidences and the folks who accomplished them clearly with their alma mater’s interest in mind. The facts and incidences speak for themselves. And it is the designated assassin who concludes for himself, that the accumulation of wrongdoing constitutes a conspiracy.
We however believe that many of the wrongdoing acts are just the product of unprincipled overzealous piggish desires to obtain more money for their university at the expense of WSU’s fair share; or otherwise the misguided view that you can better yourself by damaging someone else, who’s interest you view as contra to your own interest. The KU folks would be much better off concentrating on beating the Toledo’s, Bucknell’s, and Bradley’s of the world, instead of continuing to damaging WSU at ever opportunity, including presently attempting to preclude a reasoned determination to reinstate football at WSU.
God forbid that we should compete with KU for traditional students in our Wichita area again, or that we should try to obtain more than the present WSU allotted $145 thousand vs KU’s $130 million dollars towards an approved $435 million in 22 projects on the State Board of Regents Capital Improvement Budget. For rational folks the numbers speak for themselves.
No, for the Eagle KU scribblers, it’s just fine if the Sedgwick County tax payers get double taxed, and send more money to the state capital in Topeka than any county except perhaps Johnson county, and then additionally pay an independent mill levy tax for WSU, without getting any capital improvement money back from the state Board of Regents. It means more money for the KU folks alma mater. But its no more than political corruption! And besides, we don’t need any new buildings funded by the state, because we lost students, that went to KU and K-State for a traditional college experience. And president Beggs’ frantic tilting at windmills non-solution is to use our double taxed mill levy money to buy students with.
3. “He catalogs and stews over slights ($145 thousand vs $130 million), mistakes and contrary opinions from opponents such as university president Don Beggs (standing on the wrong side of history with his head buried in the administrative sand of his desk drawer), The Eagle (KU drive-by scribblers, with scribbler deadlines to meet and no time for substantive analysis), university official and politicians (intellectually dishonest), and others who don’t see the Saturday night light.” (Parenthesis added).
The use of the obvious figure of speech and analogy of president Beggs (standing on the wrong side of history with his head buried in the administrative sand of his desk drawer), was simply a metaphor for refusing to even allow a reasoned attempt to reinstate football – similar to president Hughes initial attempt to tear down Cessna Stadium, as directed by the then KU monopolistic controlled Board of Regents, with the Eagle’s Editorial help, having been demonstrated as being on the wrong side of history – or to allow a reasoned public debate of the issue; but rather politically intriguing to preclude an attempt even when the Mayor had obtain a commitment of $10,000,000 as an initial contribution, solely by the unmeritorious and unreasoned use of the power of his office only. If president Beggs continues to preclude the return of football by political intrigue and guile, as opposed to a reasoned discussion and determination by the effected community, he will have to maintain his position by force of office only.
The issue exhibits the truth of the issue itself. It will not go away even if we say not another ward. As opposed to president Beggs and the Eagle, our only power, is the truth of the issue itself.
Moreover, it was president Beggs who sent out his athletic director to improperly misrepresent the results of our football committee after four months of study in 1996-1997, apparently unaware that we had a copy of the original votes of the committee, as I was on the committee.
And, it was president Beggs or his surrogates that advised Councilman Brewer that the Board of Regents had to make the decision re football, not just Beggs himself, that Brewer repeated at open council meeting; which assertion we immediately challenged at the podium; and which Board of Regents alleged authority the Board was required to deny as a result of our request for public records; which thereafter required president Beggs to also then deny. Query: does Councilman Brewer think he was used or not.
At the same City Council meeting, it was also, council women Sue Schlapp who had previously advised me she was “comfortable” with what president Beggs told her about the use of the mill levy, although she could not explain any such use; and who again in open public meeting of the council advised she was “comfortable” with president Beggs representations – although no proper accounting has been accomplished on president Beggs’ watch. Only 10 page “Budget Requests” are annually provided as confirmed by both the City and County, which “Budget Requests” are not proper accounting for moneys actually spent.
But the designated assassin of the KU scribblers can’t deal with specific examples of factually unsupported descriptive labeling, so he subjectively labels categories of people as if that were the alleged wrongdoing. Suellentrop no more than subjectively assassinates, intentionally avoiding any specific factual example of alleged wrongdoing, for the reason that none exist, and he can’t factually support his subjective argument. But then, what can you expect from a drive-by scribbler.
Perhaps the major emphasis for the personal assassination attempt, is the use of the word “scribblers”. It’s a sharp knife in their ribs. It gravels them. It eats at their soul. But scribblers is not my word. It’s: “Middle English, scriblen, from Medieval Latin scribillare,” hundreds of years old. It’s what the English in descriptive fashion have called their news paper writers for a few hundred years. The truth apparently doesn’t bother the English near as much as our politically correct liberal lemmings on the petrified left. If they don’t like it, you can’t say it, notwithstanding the 1st Amendment or the vitiated Alien and Sedition laws 200 years ago.
The English also currently describe what we are required to call Media News Reporters, as “Teleprompter Readers”. No doubt, cute Katie Couric would read off the Teleprompter, with her normal plastic smile: “Good evening, this is cute Katie Couric with a fat arse reading the evening news”. I like descriptive words, that only have real substance and effect, if they have a reasonable basis in fact. The fact that the KU scribblers and their designated assassin Suellentrop have deadlines to meet and rarely offer substantive factual analysis, is valid reason to describe them as drive-by scribblers. And God forbid anyone should write a 25 page substantive factual analysis of NCAA data and graphs. It’s beyond their ability to understand, let alone substantively discuss or consider. So anyone who would do so, notwithstanding being asked by president Beggs to provide such analysis, is just involved in a “diatribe” and is to be attacked as Don Quixote tilting at windmills. But it is just fine for the Eagle to tilt at common folks in the community simply trying to solve a 20 year old continuing festering problem affecting our taxes, our community, and our university.
4. “I’d like to see it come back,” said Leon Lungwitz, a former president of the Shocker Athletic Scholarship Organization. “But I also don’t think it’s feasible without possibly damaging the other sports.” ....
“WSU’s administration has no plan to add football (or any sport), and additions are not possible if they detract from other sports, according to Beggs.”
At our first meeting concerning football with president Beggs on July 8th 2004, we put the issue that the attempt to return football should be totally independent from any present sports program, and president Beggs agreed. We said it should be a stand alone program. That if enough money could be raised to reinstate the program pursuant to a reasonable analysis of the needs, not false subjective assertions of amounts, but real analysis of the associated costs, then football should be brought back. But if a reasoned analysis of the costs vis-a-vis the amount of money commitments that could be obtained was insufficient for the program to stand alone, then the program should not be reinstated. But it is precisely this attempt and analysis the president refuses to allow. The subjective argument that it might effect other sports, is fallacious irrelevant sophistry by folks struggling for rationale to deny even an attempt to solve the problem as a stand alone program.
5. “WSU Student Government Association president Thanh Huynh said there is casual interest in football, but not an outcry. Some students favor a revival; many are wary of the cost.”
When the Shocker Black & Golds were handing out a one page position paper and Web cite business cards on the campus, the students, once they found out we were about football, universally wanted the handouts, and supported the return of football as long as it did not raise student fees. At our first meeting concerning football with president Beggs, we also said that none of the cost to reinstate the program or to continue the program, should be put on the backs of the students, and president Beggs agreed.
When Beggs’ opposition arose, and he had a assistant professor survey his class to plead the case to the Eagle that the students didn’t want football; the professor advised this writer and agreed that if he hadn’t put the issue in terms of increased student fees, that all of his students would agree and want the return of football. Even as put, with increased student fees, some 16 percent of his students wanted football, even if there fees were increased. The bottom line is that Mr. Thanh Huynh, from where ever, doesn’t speak for all the students on the issue, but only for the Eagle and president Beggs.
In fact, even if the analysis of the costs turned out to be understated and football had returned, the president would always have the option to again suspend football, without effecting other sports or student fees. So what you see is just another irrational red herring argument, put forth by the KU scribblers and president Beggs, because they have no substantive argument for not even attempting to return football.
6. “No football, they argue, means WSU is seen as a nontraditional campus and enrollment suffers....
“The traditional students want to go where they can have football on the weekends ...”
If I or the other Shocker Black & Golds said not another single word on the issue, the issue would not go away, notwithstanding the KU scribblers strident efforts. It is the truth of the issue, that continues the issue. Until the cause of the problem is resolved, and football is returned, we will not be a traditional university, and we will lose traditional students. There isn’t enough money in the mill levy to buy enough students to grow the university, and all that president Beggs can accomplish by spending our money to buy students, is to put his finger in the traditional student hole in the dike.
7. “Fans love the idea of touchdowns and cheerleaders, but most of those fans failed to support the program most seasons.”
This argument is fundamentally flawed, for the reason that it argues 20 years in the past, about different facts and circumstances. Twenty years ago the City population was 240,000.
Now the City population is 355,000; the county population is 462,896; and the Wichita Metropolitan Area is over 600,000. Our population has significantly increased, and allows for a much larger base from which to obtain season ticket holders. We have requested a contingent ticket sale, to measure the public interest support, whereby you put down a percentage of the estimated ticket price, say two thirds, and if football is returned, you owe the rest, and if not, you get your money back. It would be no risk, and would let the community vote with their money. But God forbid Beggs should allow any such contingent ticket sale, coupled with a similar contingent contribution attempt, for the obvious reason that if the community came forward, he might have to reinstate the program against his commitment to the KU folks who hired him, at the time he was given outcome determinative control of the issue by the KU folks. Nor, in months of this assertion, has president Beggs saw fit to come forth and deny it. Nor will the KU scribblers ask the question, notwithstanding the Journalists Code of Ethics, but prattle on with their subjective personal attack.
Twenty years ago, WSU was not in a football conference with all Missouri Valley teams playing football. We have said that at first it will be necessary to play as an independent, but that as we develop a team, we need to look for example, to the Mountain West Conference, with: Colorado State; Wyoming; UNLV; Air Force; BYU; TCU; New Mexico; San Diego State; and Utah. The Air Force base would fill the stadium for Air Force games. We could also play universities such as Tulsa, Rice, SMU, and Missouri State. These universities would clearly draw folks to watch the games. We once played SMU with Eric Dickerson and Craig James in Cessna Stadium, and 30,000 came out. Factually, you can’t compare the football teams we played in the past, with the kind of teams we should play to draw larger crowds. All we need is a middle of the road Mountain West level football program, to draw interest and support.
Twenty years ago, when it rained, Cessna Stadium was a mud puddle underneath the stands. The stadium has been renovated, and among many other renovations, new drainage systems and asphalt was put in under the stands. Now the Rolling Stones held concert was to in excess of 30,000 folks. The annual state high school track meet brings in over 25,000 folks to the renovated stadium.
Twenty years ago we had no mill levy support for football scholarships. If we use two years increase in the mill levy, without affecting a single existing line item on the mill levy, we can create a slot of $1,250,000 that will fund and endow 85 football scholarships – as opposed to 1683 regular scholarships funded on the mill levy last year, increased this year – as well as 85 Title IX scholarships if needed. $1,250,000 is equivalent to a $25 million dollar endowment fund invested at 5 percent annually. We would probably be the only university in the country with a fully scholarship endowed football program. With another $3,250,000 we could have a middle of the road Mountain West football program for $4,500,000. And, if we sold 20,000 season tickets at $200 per seat, we would raise $4,000,000. KU sold regular season tickets this year for $225 per seat. And this would be before we raised any moneys from contributions. President Beggs has already turned down a Mayor Mayans developed contributor’s offer of $10,000,000 to use to start a contingent contribution attempt. It seems he couldn’t bring himself to agree to name the unnamed field after the contributor or even meet with him: “I’ll have to think about it.”
In short, what the program was 20 years ago, is not legitimate rationale for the facts and circumstances that exist today; unless it is you are just bigoted against the issue and “desperately” are struggling to find some pretended argument.
8. “[W]omen’s sports (such as soccer) that would be added to comply with federal law requiring equivalent scholarship opportunities for male and female athletes.”
Nothing in the Title IX law requires equivalent scholarship opportunities. This is a red herring argument that the politically correct lemming crowd uses as an excuse for why they can’t do anything, and as an excuse for the naked lack of leadership on the issue. The law doesn’t say equivalent scholarship opportunities are mandated, and neither president Beggs nor the KU drive-by scribblers at the Eagle can cite any language in the statute making any such requirement. Moreover, the Department of Education Civil Rights office, under the Bush administration has promulgated a regulation interpreting the statute. All that needs to be accomplished is to show progress with women’s sports, or to accomplish an on line survey of the student population with Web access to determine: “if women’s needs are being fully and adequately accommodated”.
We have allotted enough slot on the mill levy for 85 women’s scholarships, just to avoid the politically correct folks, but only enough for women’s soccer might be necessary or even legally required.
After all, Division I-A football is three times more profitable than Division I-A basketball, and Division I-A football and basketball are the only profitable sports in the NCAA, with the sole exception of men’s ice hockey, which breaks even in the few schools in the northeast that have programs. The cart doesn’t come before the horse. There is no time constraint that requires women’s scholarships at the same time as men’s scholarships. In fact, since the men’s programs pay for the women’s programs that could not exist but for the men’s programs, it is acceptable to first establish a men’s program, and then use the profits at a subsequent time or additional moneys, to establish a women’s program. And we presently have one more women’s sport than men’s. Although, as I say, we have not requested that procedure, and it is unnecessary, as we would allow a slot on the mill levy to accommodate women’s needs, say a soccer team.
But the bottom line is that the Eagle knows, or in the exercise of professional journalism, should know that the Title IX law does not require “equivalent scholarship opportunities”, or “equal” anything. It’s just another red herring argument that is a non issue vis-a-vis the Mayor’s proposed approach, but the Eagle’s willingness to legally misrepresent the issue; says more about the strident KU scribblers intense lack of desire to see WSU once again as a traditional university, than it does about the legal misrepresentation. Chancellor Hemenway wouldn’t like it if he had to compete with WSU for traditional students from our Wichita area.
9. “The plan also included selling 17,000 season tickets and raising $10 million for facilities.”
At our first meeting concerning football on July 8th, 2004, president Beggs advised that he had: “Identified the money for a new football office and locker room facility to be located at the south end of the stadium, and that he would love to bring back football, if we could just show him how to pay for the scholarships.” Where, now that Mayor Mayans has broached the issue publically, is president Beggs telling us he has identified the money for a new football office and locker room facility?
Further, the concept of 17,000 season tickets, has to do with the 17,000 season ticket average required in one of four years to maintain Division I-A football. We clearly should target a 20,000 contingent season ticket sale. If however, we should commit a 17,000 season ticket sale; and given that we would not play the first year as we would be limited to 30 scholarships; it should be possible to obtain a waiver from the NCAA through their waiver process, for the first year requirement of 17,000 season tickets, if we have already sold 17,000 season tickets. Even without a waiver, if we sell 17,000 season tickets, the following year we could be Division I-A at our sole discretion, as allowed by NCAA rules.
At our meeting with president Beggs the first part of October ‘05, we asked him how much in contingent contribution pledges would it take for him to allow a contingent ticket sale drive. He immediately responded: “seven figures”, i.e., one million dollars.
But when Mayor Mayans raised $10 million dollars to start the contingent contribution attempt, unbelievably, president Beggs would not consider accepting the $10 million, even contingently, subject to his subsequent determination to reinstate football or not.
10. “The alumni group makes its points in detail on its Web site, www.alumnishockerblackandgolds.com. Pages of facts and figures state their case for football’s return. It’s also home for the theories that peg KU as one of the villains in the Shocker football saga, a grudge dating to WSU’s entry into the state university system in 1964. Beggs, according to the group, is the latest WSU president controlled by KU through the Board of Regents.”
Please note we are “blasted” for making our points in detail, supported by facts and figures. The KU scribblers at the Eagle don’t like detail, facts and figures, and deductive reasoning flowing from said detail, facts and figures. No, false subjective rationale is much easier and just fine for the KU scribblers. Just listen to what I tell you, don’t confuse me with detail, facts and figures. The truth be damned. We know what’s best for the community, and you rabble should just go away and let our bigoted opinion be unchallenged.
If we just made subjective arguments, unfounded or not, like the KU scribblers, we would be skewered by Suellentrop as being totally subjective, without any detail, facts and figures.
But president Beggs is the latest WSU president truckling to Chancellor Hemenway from the time of his commitments at his hiring by the KU folks, continuing through the last Board of Regents meeting the 19th of October, which we attended, and which was readily apparent to anyone who attended. Nor has president Beggs denied any such commitments, nor will he publically deny any such commitments.
Even the Eagle, after we had “tilted at windmills” and saved Cessna Stadium, apparently feeling their guilt for being on the wrong side of history, and not wanting to take sole responsibility for their support of the attempt to tear down the community asset of Cessna stadium; offered as their excuse that they supported the tearing down of Cessna Stadium only after president Hughes came to the Eagle and asked if they would support him if he announced he would tear down Cessna stadium. The KU folks at the Eagle at the time were only too happy to support the tear down editorially, the community asset be damned. How much do you suspect it would cost to rebuild a 30,000 seat Cessna stadium today? We are spending some $185 million plus, who knows, on what is it, a 15,000 seat arena down town. And of course, the Rolling Stones would have not come to even a new 15,000 seat arena for their concert.
Moreover, an Eagle article on July 2nd 1993, from an interview of president Hughes on July 1st, 1993, his first day in office, quoted Hughes as saying: “Neither I nor the Board of Regents have any interest in returning football to WSU.” This statement was a candid admission that Hughes had discussions on this policy issue, at the time of his interview for the position, held totally in closed executive session; contra to and in violation of the Kansas Open Records Act, at the time precluding policy discussions in closed session, and requiring policy discussions to be conducted in open session.
Accordingly, there is no question but that the KU folks on the Board of Regents, who at the time controlled the Board of Regents, committed Hughes not to bring back football to WSU as a condition of his employment.
And, when president Beggs was selected, the interview committee was chaired by Frank Sabatini, KU graduate banker and lawyer from Topeka and former regent member, co-chaired by KU professor Dr. Steve Jordan, then the Director of the Board of Regents, and three or four other KU graduates on the interview committee that selected the three candidates to submit to the Board of Regents, 6 of the 9 members of which were KU graduates, who then selected president Beggs. And, Steve Jordan, who went back to KU to teach after we “tilted at windmills” and de-packed the Board of Regents by statute, advised me that the interview committee would specifically ask certain candidates to apply for the position. Does anyone suspect that president Beggs had no prior relationship with Chancellor Hemenway, or the KU folks, before he was asked to apply for the position. Does anyone suspect that these same folks who president Hughes in essence admitted had committed him not to bring back football in closed executive session, would somehow have forgotten their desires, and would not have committed president Beggs as an invited candidate for the position, and as a condition of that position? And, president Beggs was also hired totally in closed executive session.
These assertions have long been made. President Beggs has had months to deny any such commitments, and so has Chancellor Hemenway. The air is pregnant with their silence.
But for the KU scribblers, facts are to be ignored. No questions are to be asked in their capacities as investigative journalists of Government officials, pursuant to the Journalists Code of Ethics. Only subjective assassination of us common rabble with the audacity to point out documented facts is to be accomplished; implying the asserted detail, facts and figures are to be ignored with no questions asked, and is to be impliedly presented ipso facto as without merit, with not a single fact or statement of denial of the asserted facts. If the shoe were on the other foot, the KU scribblers would be profoundly indignant, the questions from these investigative reporters would be sharp, incessant, and pregnant with implied wrongdoing. For example, akin to a presidential news conference by the so called main stream news media. The KU scribblers’ lack of attention to their own Ethics Code and hypocrisy, reeks.
11. Said Chappell: “I don’t think the Board of Regents should have any influence on whether Wichita State should have football or not.” “The Board of Regents, nine people who oversee higher education in Kansas, don’t have that control, according to Beggs and Kip Peterson, director of government relations and communications for the board.
“‘Absolutely not,” Beggs said, “I don’t have to discuss athletic expenses with the Board of Regents, because I don’t use state money for that. I don’t have to have their approval.” (Emphasis added).
Please note president Beggs carefully recrafts Chappell’s statement and couches his answer to Chappell’s assertion concerning whether or not Wichita State should “have football or not”, in terms of “athletic expenses”, not as to the decision as to whether or not their can be a football program in the first instance. It’s a clever technique to restate the assertion and issue, to a different issue, and then answer your own issue, not the issue put. The issue presented by Chappell was the issue of the Board of Regents involvement in the determination of a football program in the first instance; not whether they were involved in expenses of any athletic program. Make no mistake, president Beggs has not denied any commitment to the KU folks either directly, or through the 6 of the 9 KU regents, at the time he was selected for the position.
Also, Suellentrop put the issue 180 degrees around from how it came about in the first instance. Without question, either president Beggs directly in discussions with Councilman Brewer, or one of his surrogates, perhaps Eric Sexton for governmental affairs, advised Councilman Brewer – when president Beggs was feeling all alone as the only individual standing in the way of even any reasoned attempt to see if football could be returned – that it wasn’t president Beggs’s decision alone, but that the Board of Regents would also have to approve any determination to reinstate football. This was apparently a convincing argument for Councilman Brewer, as in open council meeting on this years requested mill levy budget, Councilman Brewer made the assertion that the Board of Regents would have to approve any return of football at WSU, and apparently relied upon that asserted fact for his opposition to any support of the issue. Subsequent to the council discussion, I was allowed 5 minutes to address the council, and I immediately advised the council and councilman Brewer specifically, that he was legally mistaken, and that the Board of Regents did not have subject matter jurisdiction over athletics at KU, K-State, or WSU.
So we were the one who contended that the Board of Regents had no subject matter jurisdiction over sports, and it was Beggs himself or one of his surrogates who erroneously advised Councilman Brewer that the Board of Regents had such authority. Suellentrop puts the issue the other way around to cover for president Beggs. As a result of Councilmen Brewer’s erroneous assertion, I submitted our open records request to the Board of Regents for any document by which the Board, directly or indirectly, claimed subject matter jurisdiction over athletics at KU, K-State, or WSU. The response was that there was no such documents, clearly admitting they claimed no such subject matter jurisdiction.
Now comes Suellentrop to present the issue as if we were wrong and Beggs was correct, when we were the ones who disagreed with Brewer publically at the council meeting, and identified and contended that the Board had no such authority, and should not be involved in any decision to reinstate football at WSU or not. It was president Beggs who was forced to back down, and was forced by the answer of the Board to our request for public records, to admit the Board had no such authority. But even then he wiggles and cleverly re-sculptures the issue in terms of “athletic expenses”, to avoid denying KU involvement in the decision of football itself. And, in the exercise of his code of ethics and journalistic diligence, Suellentrop is only two happy to repeat the assertions and cover for president Beggs, while presenting the issue to the public improperly as affirmative for Beggs and a hundred and eighty degrees out of phase with the truth of what actually happened.
12. “To Beggs, it’s simple. The university won’t add sports – or any kind of program – if it robs resources from existing ones.”
“That is why he declined the plan to use property tax dollars advanced this summer by Mayans.”
By these statements, president Beggs exhibits his gymnastic political ability to reach for high sounding rationale that he knows in inapplicable, in support of his untenable position. The attempt to return football has always been stated to be required to be a stand alone program, from the very first discussion, and president Beggs agreed. If the program can’t be funded as a stand alone program, then it should not be brought back. Beggs knows this agreement, and he knows no other sports program would be affected, but he offers the rationale as a plausible excuse for his intransigence to the unknowing public, precisely because he knows the general public doesn’t know the agreed upon truth. Just like he agreed student fees would not be increased for the return of football, but presently finds it convenient as an excuse for his intransigence, to allow surrogates to suggest a increase in student fees, because he knows he can then gain some support from students that don’t want their fees raised. He knows that if he says no student fees would be raised for football, then the entire student body would want the return of football. Even in the survey ran by the assistant professor, cited above, some 16 percent of the class wanted football, even if it meant their fees would be increased. President Beggs is simply not intellectually honest on either of these two issues.
Nor should it slip by anyone, that president Beggs has absolute control of the issues and the money. If anyone is going to do any robbing from one program to another, it is president Beggs who is accomplishing the process, just as he shuffles carry over mill levy money from one year to the next for what ever purpose he desires with no proper apparent accounting, as evidenced by his shameless Memorandum:
MEMORANDUM
“Patsy Selby
FROM: Donald L. Beggs
SUBJECT: FY 2002 Mill Levy - Final Numbers
Now that we know the final revenues from the FY 2002 mill levy budget, please transfer the amount of $246,219 from the President’s contingency to the Welcome Center fund. In addition, for budget presentation purposes for the FY 2004 mill levy budget process these funds should be presented as spent during FY 2002.” (Emphasis added).
The mill levy is accounted for on a fiscal year basis, ending on June 30, and beginning on July 1st. Carry over money from the FY 2002 mill levy budget, would have been finalized after June 30, 2003, and the transfer president Beggs is requiring, is therefore occurring in 2003, sometime after June 30th, 2003. President Beggs instruction that FY 2002 carry overs from various mill levy line items, are to be transferred after the FY 2002 fiscal year, to the Welcome Center fund in the later half of 2003, but shown in the documents for the FY 2004 mill levy budget process, as having been spent on the designated line items in FY 2002, is clear evidence that he absolutely controls the budget process and whether or not any “robbing of resources” from one program to another is to be accomplished.
It has come to our attention from a county commissioner and from newspaper articles on the new Wichita Area Technical Center at the Jabara Campus, that while president Beggs seemed initially not to be interested in WSU’s involvement in the WATC project,
that he is now expressing his interest, apparently after being presently asked by the County Commission to oversee the administration of the WATC, we suspect by the use of WSU mill levy money. Although the facts are presently nebulous to us, apparently there is some $2,000,000 shortfall projection for the administration of the operation of the Technical Center, and WSU is being asked to accomplish this administration by use of the mill levy. If our understanding is correct, and it may not be, then president Beggs on behalf of the County Commission’s request, would be clearing squeezing the mill levy budget and “robbing” from one or more existing mill levy line items, to fund and accommodate the administration of the WATC. This is precisely what he says he will not do. What is it do you suspect would be the quid pro quo for any such agreement by WSU? We wonder, could it possibly have anything to do with accountings for past mill levy expenditures?
Finally, after ten months, president Beggs bothers to favor us with the sole reason he refused to consider Mayor Mayans plan he asked Mayans for in the first instance, i.e. “That is why he declined the plan to use property tax dollars advanced this summer by Mayans.” The “that” as rationale, was: “To Beggs, it’s simple. The university won’t add sports – or any kind of program – if it robs resources from existing ones.” So there you have it. The sole reason president Beggs offers for intransigently being unwilling to even consider a rational attempt to being back football and thereby solve our 20 year old festering loss of traditional student problem, is that an alleged potential exists, for which he has absolute control, that he won’t add any program: “if it robs resources from existing ones”. But he agreed at the very first meeting that it had to be a stand alone program. Shortly put, there had to be sufficient funds so that the football program could stand by itself, independent of any other athletic income, or football should not be brought back. If we raised sufficient moneys so that the football program would be funded and could stand alone, there would be no negative affect upon other sports. However, the potential for positive affects would be there, for the reason that nationally, Division I-A football is three times more profitable than Division I-A basketball as established by NCAA statistics.
Moreover, president Beggs would always have complete control, as he presently has alone, the authority to preclude the return of football; to again suspend the program in the future, should for some unforseen circumstance, he would need additional moneys for the football program and could not obtain them. But clearly, he doesn’t have to “rob” resources from one program to another, as he alone has that determination, and he alone could determine to suspend the football program, irrespective of whether it was justified or not. President Beggs ipsit repsit rexit flaxit shell game rationale, is simply a red herring excuse to cover the real reason he intransigently refuses to rationally allow a legitimate reasoned attempt to canvass the community to see if we can reasonably return football to WSU.
13. “‘I don’t want to spend tax payer dollars on additional sports,’ Beggs said.”
The very fundamental basis of the mill levy in the first instance was to pay off the then existing outstanding capital improvement debt of the university, consisting of some $1.5 million on the round house, a sporting facility, so that the assets of the university could be transferred to the state debt free. We have paid off the original then existing outstanding capital improvement debt that we voted to accomplish, decades ago. The mill levy has simply been continued on a year by year basis, without any further vote of the City or Sedgwick County tax payers.
When 10 years ago we renovated Cessna Stadium, at a time the then athletic director, Bill Belknap, claimed on behalf of president Hughes, that it would cost $26 million to renovate the stadium, we did so at a cost of $3.2 million, of which $2.2 million was placed on the mill levy. Again, we have an athletic facility being funded on the mill levy.
The real reason president Beggs pretends his concern for tax payer money, has nothing to do with the merits of football. It has everything to do with president Beggs previous commitments and ear marking mill levy money for future obligations.
When president Beggs told us he would “love to bring back football if we could just show him how to fund the scholarships”, we subsequently proposed use of a slot on the mill levy in the amount of $1,250,000 representing about two years increase in the mill levy, without affecting a single existing mill levy line item. A slot of $1,250,000 would fund 85 football scholarships and 85 Title IX scholarships.
The mill levy budget request contains $900,000 annually for acquisition of property around the campus, and if not for that the notes say for campus facilities, and if not for that then for the new engineering lab buildings fund. We believe this $900,000 is in fact used to debt service the new engineering lab buildings, as the annual debt service is precisely $900,000. But we do admit there is no exhibited accounting from the university to the City or County for how it is, in fact, this $900,000 annually is actually spent.
President Beggs has orally advised that some $2.5 million on the Marcus Welcome Center is funded in some manner by the mill levy, although the Marcus Welcome Center does not appear on the annual mill levy budget requests, as far as we can discern from our review of same.
Also, we believe that the so called university “outreach program” includes funding on the mill levy budget request for the new west side campus, although again, it is not readily apparent from the budget requests, although perhaps in some fashion intended to be indicated.
Further, when Mayor Mayans presented a funding plan, as requested by president Beggs, he chose to include the $500,000 usually allotted for the contingency line item, so that he would then understand what the contingency line item was used for, and to allow some wiggle room and insurance, should some unforseen circumstance arise. We did not object to the proposed use of the $500,000 “contingency” line item at the time, because we believed it was reasonable, and that it was in fact for contingency. It now appears that this $500,000 line item was already ear marked for future use, and could not be available to for the Mayor’s proposed plan; as eight days prior to advising the Eagle that the contingency line item went “mostly” for scholarships, president Beggs instructed the trustees to transfer $500,000 dollars from the WSU foundation to the scholarship fund; perhaps to cover his subsequent representation to the Eagle, concerning the Mayor’s request to use the $500,000 supposedly in the “contingency line item fund”. Perhaps some or all of this contingency line item was already obligated to debt service some or part of the Marcus Welcome Center or the new West Side Campus debt service obligations.
Suffice it to say, we believe none of these building projects: the new Engineering Lab Buildings; the Marcus Welcome Center; or the West Side Campus, are directly specifically identified as funded on the mill levy. Nor do we believe that either the City Council or the County Commission has directly knowledgeably voted for or authorized the debt servicing of these building projects on the mill levy. Why is it do you suspect that president Beggs apparently didn’t ask either the City or County to knowledgeably directly authorize these building projects on the capital improvements mill levy budget requests?
Given the Board of Regents policy of providing no money to WSU for new building projects, but rather requiring WSU to look to the mill levy, thereby effectively double taxing Sedgwick County tax payers uniquely form all other counties in the state;
and given president Beggs desires for the projects; perhaps the administration thought that they may not have been able to obtain complete agreement from the City and County, and did not want to run the risk of adverse knowledgeable decisions. Perhaps that is why the money appears to simply be shuffled around on the mill levy to cover the committed expenditures.
It is precisely because of the Board of Regents policy of requiring WSU to look to the mill levy, particularly for capital improvements, resulting in effective double taxation uniquely of Sedgwick County Tax payers, compared to all other county tax payers in the state, that we went to the Board of Regents regular monthly meeting the 19th of October, and asked the Board to take over the annual debt service of $900,000 to the completion year of 2017, which debt service should have been paid for in the first instance by the Board from state funds for capital improvements. (See our Oct. 19th Board of Regents presentation on our Web site).
Also, we wrote a letter request to president Beggs, requesting that since we have now broached the issue with the Board of Regents, he has a perfect opportunity to now also request the Board pick up the $900,000 debt service, so as to open up the availability of $900,000 on the mill levy, so that we can use our local money to solve our loss of traditional student problem, with the funding of football scholarship on the mill levy, and to perhaps fund the proposed WSU administration of the Wichita Area Technical College. Whether president Beggs will dither or will now request our fair share of the state Board of Regents capital improvements budget on behalf of the university he represents, thereby providing himself and the university an additional $900,000 annually to the year 2017 for flexibility to solve our local problems; or will evidence his prior commitment to Chancellor Hemenway and the KU folks, remains to be seen and is presently unknown. We should all pray for reason to prevail, but don’t gamble on it or hold your breath. By the November Board of Regents meeting, we will see.
Whether or not the Board of Regents will now properly take over the debt service of the new engineering lab buildings, as they should have in the first instance, or will thumb their collective noses at us, we will have to wait until their November meeting to see. Stay tuned. But be assured, if they do not, we will rigorously seek a remedy with local and state officials. As Sedgwick County tax payers, we do not intend to continue to be uniquely double taxed in the state, as opposed to all other counties, simply by the internal policy of the Board of Regents that has been on going for decades, with the Board not building a single new building for WSU in the 42 years WSU has been in the state system.
The bottom line truth we believe is: that football should not be blamed for the current opposition of president Beggs; and his present unwillingness to expend our mill levy moneys as the Mayor and we have proposed; but rather we believe it is the administrative quagmire of lack of proper accounting for our mill levy moneys, and the pre commitment and ear marking of those moneys, including particularly the $900,000 and $500,000 contingency line items, that we believe is the real cause of president Beggs intransigency and lack of flexibility with even the annual additions to the mill levy.
14. “‘Where are the dollars?’ Beggs said. ... ‘We are talking about an enormous amount of money.’”
When Mayor Mayans broached the subject of the return of football at WSU for the good of the community as well as the university, both economically and as a benefit to the character of a large community needed to attract new folks and maintain our own young folks, he just didn’t throw out a bone for dogs to fight over, he put his shoulder to the wheel and worked to make it happen. Did president Beggs pick up the phone, call the mayor, and say: Mr. Mayor, you have an interesting idea that would benefit the university and would solve our loss of traditional student 20 year old problem; what is it do you have in mind about how to fund the program, and how can I help? No, this anthesis of Thinkers, Doers, Movers, and Shockers, made no such attempt, but rather politically intrigued behind the mayor’s back to control the votes of the City Council, and to obtain the Eagle’s support, without any knowledge of how Mayor Mayans might help to finance the program. And, after some three months of hiding from the mayor’s phone calls, Mayans was finally able to get president Beggs to return a call, and Mayans then set up a meeting with Beggs for Beggs office. At this meeting, president Beggs required a plan before he would consider the issue. So Mayor Mayans diligently put together a written plan, and at the second and last meeting in Mayan’s office, provided the plan, and presented an out-of-state contributor’s offer of $10 million to start a campaign for contingent contributions. Incredibly, president Beggs turned down the offer of $10 million, refusing to name the unnamed football after the contributor, saying in some convoluted fashion of rationale: “We have had trouble naming fields after people”, although there is hardly a square inch of the Koch Arena that doesn’t have someone’s name on it. He was then asked if he would at least agree to meet with the out-of-state contributor. To which he exhibited his unwillingness by saying: “I’ll have to think about it.”
President Beggs didn’t have to pretend he didn’t know who the $10 million was coming from, he was told. And, the $10 million was coming from a man who is capable of making a significant contribution, regularly does so, and the amount did not shock his conscience and would not have significantly challenged or taxed his ability to make said contribution.
With a $1,250,000 slot on the mill levy, to fully endow all the football as well as Title IX scholarships, equivalent to a $25 million endowment fund invested at 5 percent annually, president Beggs was being offered the $10 million cash and the equivalent of $35 million, just to start a campaign to raise contingent contributions, without any obligation to then make a decision to return football or not. Only after the results of a campaign to raise contingent contributions, would president Beggs then need to make a decision, yes or no.
Moreover, president Beggs was well aware of the fact that a slot on the mill levy of $1,250,000 was equivalent to a $25 million endowment fund, as he has bragged about the mill levy in total being the equivalent of a $125 million endowment fund.
When this issue was broached by the Mayor on January 19th ‘06, the president trotted out his athletic director to publically announce in grave tones, as if unattainable, that it would cost $30 million to reinstate football. No explanation of the elements required or the cost of the elements amounting to $30 million was offered, and the probability is they were not considered and were unknown to the athletic director and the president. When we challenged the athletic director and the president to come forth with an identification of the individual elements necessary and the cost of each, we were met by a deafening silence. Now it is the president was being offered by the mayor the equivalent of $35 million just to agree to allow the start of a campaign to raise addition cash contributions committed over a four year period, but incredibly, with his leadership on behalf of the university, thumbed his nose at the opportunity and the money. And this was $5 million more than he initially trotted his athletic director out to claim, unsupported by any analysis or explanation.
So, how much is it now president Beggs, that you will claim is necessary for the return of football? When will you favor us with the amount of your demand? To date, the president has provided no position paper, no analysis, and not a single written sentence as to any reasoned analysis of the elements, requirements, and costs. He relies totally upon his title of president, postures regally, and trots out surrogates and toadies to announce subjective opinions unsupported by detail, facts, figures, and deductive reasoning flowing rationally from such detail, facts, and figures. And finally he enlists the KU scribblers at the Eagle to carry his water for him, and provides a few subjective snippet statements of no real force or substantive effect. We are all expected to just genuflect to the title and the hand in the vest posture. But we don’t think we should.
So is it $50 million to determine to reinstate football? How much is it president Beggs? Your subjective statement: “We are talking about an enormous amount of money”, is no more than mere subjective talk gymnastics, designed to hide the inability to quantitatively exhibit an analysis of the required elements and state their estimated amounts identifying the total estimation of the cost to return football. It’s simply a poor excuse for the lack of a reasoned analysis, and of no substance or usefulness whatsoever. But it does give you something to say, when you have no facts and no reasoned case to present.
Query: do you suspect Mayor Mayans, who developed a $10 million contribution from an out-of-state contributor, might also have the ability to raise another $15 million from local contingent contributors? With $25 million cash, and the scholarships fully endowed, the equivalent of a $25 million endowment fund, we would have an equivalent $50 million program, without ever selling a single season ticket. To us poor Black & Golds rabble, $50 million is not only an enormous amount of money, it is beyond our comprehension as to even how big a pile it would be. And, we would have probably the only fully scholarship endowed football program in the country. With the scholarships endowed, and not needed to be payed for annually out of football income, all that would be necessary to be supported annually, would be coaches salaries, trainer and staff salaries, uniforms and equipment, supplies, travel expenses, perhaps some additional insurance premiums, etc.
At our first meeting concerning football on July 8th 2004, president Beggs advised us that he: “had identified the money for a new facility to be located at the south end of the football field, for coaches offices and locker room and training facilities.” He also advised us at our last meeting the first part of October 2005: “that when the contributors for the Koch Arena project and their companies came off their contributions in 2006 (we took this to mean fiscal year contributions, June 30) that he would then affirmatively seek their contributions for the return of football, and he would accept contributions in equal payments over a four year time period.” Where is it do you suspect the “identified” money for a new football athletic facility went? Given president Beggs campaign initiating instantly after Mayor Mayans public policy statement on January 19th 2006, to preclude any reasoned attempt to consider the return of football, does anyone suspect president Beggs had any intention of soliciting local folks for contributions over four years towards the return of football, even contingent upon his subsequent decision based upon the results of his efforts and the amounts that could be obtained. Or, was he in fact just posturing, in the hope that he could delay and put off the issue, and that we would dither?
President Beggs representation that he was looking at us poor Shocker Black & Golds for sufficient money to bring back football, strains credulity, should anyone believe the assertion, other than the KU scribbler Beggs’ water carriers, to say it kindly. Us poor Black & Golds all tried our best to become rich, including investing in significant shares of World Com in the hope that the company would be able to come out of Chapter 11 reorganization, and return to its previous vicinity of stock price, thereby allowing us to fund WSU football, but sadly it didn’t happen. We tried to become rich enough to fund football, but we lost. We are sorry and apologize for being poor. God didn’t see fit to make us all rich, and has a different plan for each of us. But somehow we don’t think president Beggs ever considered us poor rabble having sufficient moneys to be candidates to contribute significant moneys necessary for the return of football to the university and the community. Not only do we think his tongue was in his cheek in face of Suellentrop’s gullibility and willingness to print anything personally insulting about our group, but we also take it as a personal insult from the president, who without doubt has always known we are poor.
If we accomplished a contingent season ticket sale, targeted at 20,000 season tickets, at $200 per ticket – this year KU sold normal season tickets for $225 per ticket – we would raise $4 million for the annual operation of the program, with $1,250,000 of the normal expense for scholarships already endowed, for the equivalent of a $5,250,000 annual stand alone football program.
The 17,000 season ticket target stated in Mayor Mayans’ plan, was to accomplish the NCAA requirement of Division I-A of 17,000 season tickets sold in one of the last four years, to allow us to apply for a waiver of the requirement, having already sold 17,000 season tickets. But we could only recruit 30 players the first year anyway, and would not play until the second year. Even if a waiver were not granted the first year, the decision to be Division I-A is left to the institution, as long as the requirements are met, and we would at least meet the conditions, even without a waiver, the second year of play.
We would probably initially play as an independent, and subsequently apply for membership in a football conference such as the Mountain West Conference, for example. With the Air Force base locally, playing The Air Force Academy would probably sell out Cessna stadium. If we were bringing in schools such as Mountain West teams, along with Tulsa, SMU, Rice, Missouri State, etc., we should clearly be able to sell 20,000 season tickets.
A middle of the road Mountain West program costs around $4.5 million annually, which is approximately the median average of the lower half of the 117 Division I-A universities nationally. Old Dominion, with a woman president apparently not committed to any other university’s interest in the state, has recently announced Old Dominion will reinstate football with a $5 million fund, with the target of increasing the fund to $10 million by the time they start play. For some folks, leadership isn’t quite so expensive.
With an equivalent $5,250,000 annual program, with $4 million cash, we could clearly have a middle of the road Mountain West football program. With our increased population base now over 1986, now 462,896 folks in the county, and over 600,000 in the Wichita Metro area, and with playing teams folks would like to see, we should have no trouble averaging 20,000 season tickets a year. We don’t need to have a high dollar program such as USC, Ohio State, Miami, Michigan, Texas, Oklahoma, etc., or even KU or K-State. All we need is to be a traditional university again, now with a traditional middle of the road football program, which traditional university we were when we agreed to submit and inter into the state higher education system as an equal member, unencumbered by personal commitments to KU interests, and subject to equal considerations for state capital improvement moneys.
15. “WSU’s fall enrollment in 1986 stood at 16,843. It is at 14,298 this fall. ... Correlating football and enrollment is not an exact science, however. WSU’s enrollment rose to 17,052 in 1987 and hit a record 17,419 in 1989 – all without football.”
What the statistics presented fail to consider, and what is not presented, is the number of additional mill levy scholarships that were issued to mask and cover the affect of the suspension of football and the loss of traditional students at the time of said suspension.
The statistics additionally fail to consider, how many foreign students were recruited at the time to help cover the loss of traditional students. There has been an influx of foreign students, particularly Asian students coming on scholarships to study engineering at WSU. These students knew and cared nothing about American football, but came for the engineering education, to then mostly return to their homeland.
Also affecting the student numbers, is the fact that it took three years to see the full effect of the loss of traditional students, and the working of traditional students through to graduation. Traditional students at the university at the time of suspension of football, were caught and really had no choice but to continue to graduation. The full effect of the decision to suspend football would necessarily have to wait for three years, as clearly indicated by the numbers, and ignored by the KU scribblers exhibited factual analysis and analytical ability.
Furthermore, the 14,298 number this fall, is in reality overstated, but for the some 2000 scholarships we now have funded on the mill levy. In reality, if we weren’t out buying students with mill levy money, including free meals, $11,000 a year scholarships, free dorm lodging, and two free basketball tickets, we would realistically be looking at, and we should be saying relative to the loss of traditional students, that our enrollment was some 12,000 students, not the actual 14,298. We have accordingly lost in traditional students, some 5000 students since we suspended football in 1986, and in any case are now down 9000 in actual students to where we were with K-State in 1986.
But searching questions and reasoned analysis is hard work and apparently not the forte of the investigative reporter KU scribbler president Beggs’ water carriers at the Eagle.
Moreover, both the president and the KU Scribblers ignore not only the NCAA statistics studies they know to exist, finding: ”A direct measurable relationship between the suspension of football and the loss of students”, but also ignore the most directly relevant Kansas experience evidenced by the K-State vis-a-vis WSU experience starting in 1986. WSU was gaining students and was being projected to shortly surpass K-State (not an insignificant point in history), with then 442 students less that K-State, with K-State at about 17,300 students. Now K-State is over 23,000 and the delta difference is some 9000 students. Those figures do not lie, and speak for themselves. The Board of Regents hired president Wefald and charged him with stopping the precipitous bleeding of students and to emphasis football, as K-State had won one game in the previous ten years in the then Big 8 Conference, was written up in Sports Illustrated as the worst football program in the history of the sport, and was actively being talked about by Big 8 Conference officials, as being a candidate to be ejected from the league. If so, there was concern KU might be next, as the KU football program was shambling along not much better than K-State. At the same time the then KU controlled Board of Regents determined to suspend football at WSU. As a result, the Board simply transferred K-State’s loss of student problem to WSU in the form of a loss of traditional student problem, and in the process significantly damaged our university for the last 20 years.
Now there is just no doubt about the NCAA independent study and determination of the direct measurable relationship of the suspension of football and the corresponding loss of students, and the direct in state WSU vis-a-vis K-State definitive experience resulting in 9000 students difference. But this factual knife in the ribs is hard for the president to take, so he defends by pretending mental gymnastics with a few numbers taken out of context, and then argues contra to definitive independent NCAA funded studies of all the national relevant data, knowing of the studies, having had us analyze the studies for him, but nevertheless ignoring them. But the public at large won’t know, so what’s the difference? The difference is, some folks would consider it intellectually dishonest, particularly in a position of leadership. And the KU scribblers exhibit by the process, knowing of the studies – we had hand carried copies to them – that they care not a whit about the Journalists Code of Ethics, if in fact they have ever bothered to read it.
16. “When our enrollment went down is when community college enrollment went up,” said Beggs.
So why in substance, is that statement an excuse for why WSU lost traditional students? We lost traditional students because without football at WSU they went directly to KU and K-State, as well as other traditional universities, and directly to Butler County Jr. College (incidently to enjoy the number 1 caliber junior college football team in the country), to get two years of general requirements out of the way at half the WSU tuition costs, while staying at home at less expense; and then transferring to KU and K-State, etc., to graduate with a traditional university prestigious degree, while enjoying a traditional university experience with a traditional football program, homecoming, marching bands, fraternities and sororities, and related activities, etc.
Since 1986 and our suspension of football, every university and community college in the state has grown and gained students, with the sole exception being WSU, which struggles by buying students with mill levy money to lower the delta increment of loss of traditional students.
This mindless prattle that the reason our WSU enrollment went down was because community college enrollment went up, says no more than: yes, when these traditional students didn’t go to WSU, they went to Butler County, KU, and K-State. Thank you president Beggs. If president Beggs’ prattle had any substance at all, and it doesn’t, why then, when community college enrollment went up, did KU, K-State, Emporia State, Pittsburg State, and Fort Hays State, enrollment also go up? Why didn’t KU, K-State, Emporia State, Pittsburg State, and Fort Hays State, enrollment go down to be consistent with your assumed rationale? We don’t know, but maybe, perhaps, it could just be because they all had a traditional football program, maybe. Our entire state has increased in population since 1986, and every university and community college in the state has grown and increased in enrollment, except WSU. The problem is not just the loss of traditional students, it’s the lack of growth of students for 20 years, like every other educational institution in the state.
On president Beggs watch of 8 years, he has managed to lately break even, only by the process of using our tax mill levy money to bribe and buy students with scholarship money, which is not a permanent solution to the festering loss of traditional student, and lack of growth of students 20 year old problem, as there will never be enough mill levy money to grow the student body, but is only presently a finger in the dike headed for continued under funding by the state, and a lack of growth disaster.
It’s time to put the mindless prattle aside, and get on with our fair representation in the state for our fair share of the state capital improvement budget, and to return to the traditional university we were when we agreed to come into the state system, with a traditional football program and traditional students from the Wichita Area entitled to and allowed to stay home for their college education with corresponding lessor board and room expenses to their state tax paying parents.
17. “Combative attitude”
For some two years prior to July 8th 2004, we openly discussed the return of football to WSU with president Beggs, but said we would wait until the Koch Arena project was finished and the university had a year of basketball in the new Koch Arena behind it, before we would make any attempt to return football to WSU. On July 8th 2004 we had our first meeting with president Beggs concerning football, and opined that we thought it was now time to have an open debate in the community to see if it might be possible to return football to WSU and solve our loss of traditional student problem. From July 8th 2004 till at least the first of October, 2005, some year and three months, we worked with president Beggs without a combative relationship. Only after Mayor Mayan’s public policy statement on January 19th this year, when president Beggs thereafter surreptitiously politically intrigued to preclude any reasonable attempt to have a reasoned public debate of the pros and cons and a reasoned attempt to contingently solicit contributions towards a subsequent reasoned decision to bring back football or not; and it subsequently became obvious to us that president Beggs was doing so, did we respond to president Beggs’ declared war, and join the then ongoing battle. We even waited until after he trotted out his Athletic Director to make false statements, and our subsequent letter asking if the Athletic Director in fact represented president Beggs’ views; until it became obvious that he was speaking on behalf of the president, that we then joined the battle.
The president had and has unilateral ultimate power and authority to make the decision yes or no, standing in his little patch of sovereignty, but absolute power can be cruel to its holders. It seduces them and then leads them astray. We have no power. The KU scribblers at the Eagle, have the Eagle’s distribution machinery, the Eagle’s money, 1000 times more circulation, and 55 gallon barrels of ink to write with to express their bigoted drive-by KU scribbler views. All we have is the truth of the facts and some kind of capacity for words and to sculpture the English language, and some kind of ability to analytically understand the facts and let the facts through the process of deductive reasoning, reasonably suggest the solution, and to thereafter plead the case.
I am a forth generation Kansan, the product of hard-driving Scottish forefathers who came out west to settle, create a life, and to provide for their families. My great great great grandfather was at Fort Phil Kearny in 1866 when the Sioux of Red Cloud led by Crazy Horse, and some Cheyenne, massacred Captain Fetterman and his 82 men on Lodge Trail Ridge just outside of Fort Kearny. My great great grandfather died subsequently from wounds he received in the Civil War. My great grandfather homesteaded on the open range in western Kansas in 1885, some seven years after the Northern Cheyenne of Little Wolf and Dull Knife marauded through the same western Kansas from the Nations back to the Black Hills of South Dakota. They were willing to take risks, and they were willing to fight; they’d have stayed back east if they weren’t. Like my father and his fathers before him, I’m willing to be combative for justice and principle if I’m put to it, as I was in this circumstance. And of course, the Eagle assassination scribblers know about combative attitude, as evidenced by their actions prior to the article, and the article itself, as evidenced above.
But neither I nor the Black & Golds are the issue. We are simply the bearer of the facts as we are given the light to see the facts and plead the case. That we do so, doesn’t make us the cause of the facts. The facts exists of their own right. We just help them plead their case. Even if we said not another word, the loss of traditional students 20 year old festering problem would still exist and will not go away, and so will the cause of that problem, the suspension and lack of a traditional football program to attract traditional students, still exist and will not go away until the solution of returning football is accomplished.
Folks with absolute power are not easily persuaded. But no one is ultimately immune to reason. Not president Beggs, not his water carrying KU scribblers at the Eagle, nor his knee jerk four supporters on the City Council, no one. If the case goes long enough, justice and the truth will out.
18. The Eagle Knows About Venom
Posit: the liberal Eagle’s attack assassin “Crowson’s view”.
I like descriptive words. They help plead the case. But they only have a basis for driving home the point, if the facts underlying the words in fact support the words. In truth, it is the underlying facts that cut and drive the point home, not the words by themselves. The KU drive-by scribblers for the Eagle, don’t like to be called scribblers, it gravels them, even to a 1000 times less circulation, but that’s exactly what they are, as the English for hundreds of years have accurately determined. But if you label them scribblers, there’s hell to pay, and they get out the Eagle’s 55 gallon barrels of ink and assign a paid assassin to assassinate you with the Eagle’s money, machinery, and circulation. They know about venom at the Eagle, they are paid professionals at it.
CONCLUSION
The above and forgoing is our considered unrecompensed response to the Eagle paid for public assassination attempt designated by the KU drive-by scribblers at the Eagle; we stand ready to respond to the next such assassination attempt.
cc: City Council Sincerely submitted.
County Commission Shocker Black & Golds
Mayor Carlos Mayans
Commissioner Dave Unruh
Community Leaders By:
Board of Regents Members Fred Marrs
Subscribe