Other campuses should play a role in preserving diversity

To the Daily:
Firstly, I would like to voice my frustration with how often we forget our fellow Wolverines to the north and east. As the daughter of professors at both branch campuses, I first fell in love with the University of Michigan not in Ann Arbor, but in the passion for higher education in the students and faculty of the Flint and Dearborn campuses.

While the prestige of the “other campuses” may not equal that of Ann Arbor, I believe we need to look to them to solve our current admissions dilemma. University President Mary Sue Coleman voiced her desire to preserve diversity while abiding by the legal restrictions of Proposal 2. Emily Beam’s column (The other campuses, 12/13/2006) provides an answer.

As is, Ann Arbor is not welcoming to non-traditional undergraduate students – that is, those who do not enter college directly after high school. Beam states that more than three-quarters of the population of our state is not college-educated. Such people are often of lower socioeconomic backgrounds and race also plays a role. Making our application process and our campus more welcoming to those pursuing higher education at any age could create diversity well beyond what we were capable of before the passage of Prop 2.

Clare Wrobel
LSA Sophomore

Marching band’s sacrifices an inspiration

To the Daily:
Blessings and respect to the University of Michigan band members and students who departed Rose Bowl activities in order to perform in Grand Rapids for the funeral ceremony of former President Gerald Ford. You are indeed an inspiration.

Rita Bombassaro
Purdue University staff

Michigan football at a disadvantage nationally

To the Daily:
Fellow Michigan football fans, as a University graduate and a lifelong student of statistics and economics, I must point out certain misconceptions regarding our fine group of football players and maybe our finest coach ever, Lloyd Carr. All things being equal, Michigan should indeed have a better postseason record and arguably even a national title. However, as fans of Michigan football, you must know that all things are not equal for us and they never have been.

Natural grass: Those teams that play on natural grass at home have a far higher chance of winning games than those that play on artificial surfaces (including the newer FieldTurf). Top programs like Texas, USC, LSU, Miami, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Ohio State, Alabama, Notre Dame, Penn State and Georgia all play on natural grass. In fact, with the exception of Nebraska and Washington, no team that plays on artificial surfaces at home has won the Division I-A national championship since Pitt in 1976. Only one team that plays on artificial surfaces at home (St. Louis Rams) has ever won the Super Bowl.

Away games: The Rose Bowl is located 16 miles from USC’s campus, whereas the Michigan team and fan base must travel more than 2,200 miles and three time zones. Even in professional sports, players and coaches agree that the team playing with a three-hour time zone difference is at a competitive disadvantage. We are stuck in a perpetual away game disadvantage in each and every Pac 10/Big Ten Rose Bowl game.

We are not on equal footing, my fellow Michigan fans – and we may never be. You want to see Michigan do better? Then how about we bring USC out to the Big House in late November? Would there be any doubt about who would win that game?

What Carr and this team accomplished this year was nothing short of spectacular. I support Carr and his coaching staff 100 percent. The players that lost these two final heartbreakers represent the finest maize and blue has to offer.

Mitchell Henderson

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.