12/21/24
September 27, 2004
[Scott] Cate is a multimillionaire - he won't divulge exactly how much he is worth - who has turned Cottonwood High's athletic facilities into premier venues. : To some, he is a savior who has taken their children, many of whom struggle with school work, and given them a place to hang out where they can hone their athletic skills and focus on their academic goals in the tutoring program he runs. To others, he is a meddling father who uses his money to recruit players so his son Alex, the Colts' junior starting quarterback, is surrounded by talented athletes.
posted by mr_crash_davis to general at 07:52 PM - 8 comments
Well I guess he used to be a telemarketer which raises the hackles somewhat, but I struggle to object to a man investing in sports facilities benefitting the community. I don't know much about the USian education system but it appears to be a public school where anyone can enrol. If it was some kind of elitist environment with admission restricted by wealth or educational ability I'd have more problems with it.
posted by squealy at 04:33 AM on September 28, 2004
What I dislike is that his support for academic programs seems to take the exclusive form of a tutoring program geared at keeping jocks eligible. Sure, other kids can get tutoring too, but the program seems like a fancy band-aid with an NFL logo on it. If he really wanted to "give back to his son's community", he'd be supporting the core academic programs. The sports programs are fantasyland; when these kids graduate, where will they be?
posted by lil_brown_bat at 05:44 AM on September 28, 2004
lbb, I hear you, but as much as I'd personally prefer the money to go to directly benefit all the students who could use it, at least some students (who happen to be athletes) will be better off than if he kept the $$$ in his pockets. This is kind of what I was trying to get at in my original comment. One could, from such a perspective, criticize nearly any charitable effort that does not directly benefit the most needy people on the planet or the giver's country as not being the best use of funds.
posted by billsaysthis at 11:33 AM on September 28, 2004
Is his phone number printed anywhere in the article?
posted by worldcup2002 at 11:57 AM on September 28, 2004
Understood, bill -- I wasn't criticizing it as a less-than-perfect effort. As it happens, I get to see a lot of high school sports, and I know a lot of high school athletes who play for a school that has very little money. Their coaches would love to have a college-grade weight room, too -- but they're a pretty wise bunch, and I think they might feel some qualms at the same time. A tutoring program can be great, but only if it enables a kid to start succeeding academically on his/her own. If it's a crutch that an athlete will need on an ongong basis, just to achieve a passing grade, it's perpetuated rather than solved the problem. If it were my school, I'd want to take a real hard look at this tutoring program to see if it's really accomplishing anything.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:13 PM on September 28, 2004
Many schools need these kind of donations. We're really not interested in higher taxes are we? Well, he gets to spend his money how he sees fit and I can think of a lot worse places than this. That said, people who make millions through telemarketing are a pretty low form of life; somewhere between a remora and that special bacteria that breaks down shit. I suggest he give all his money away. Aside: I do think though that investing in sports is a great contributor to anyone's education. The things learnt on teams and in pursuit of the physical are things we are sorely lacking in early education. That and we're a bunch of crazy fat-asses. Have you been to your local state fair grounds? Sometime, not long ago, we went from cherubic to super-fat. People have to live in warm climates because they can't get their arms into a shirt-sleeve. Bring back mandatory physical activity!
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:16 PM on September 28, 2004
I think investing in sports is great too, but I think it can backfire if it's an individual selectively donating his or her largesse to certain pet projects. It kind of puts a school on the spot when someone says, "I'll give you x dollars to build a new [insert facility of choice]." Maybe a donor would love to see a new spiffy all-weather track, but maybe the school has a more pressing need for a new baseball field. Obviously it's a would-be donor's right to attach any strings he or she wants, and it's the school's right to say no thanks, but I think there's a better way to donate. The school I mentioned above is lucky enough (although it's not really luck) to have a great athletic association, which raises funds for athletic programs. Coaches and administrators can write grant applications for projects and present them to the athletic association, whenever they need funds for something that's not covered by the school budget. It has a good effect of evening out any inequities or problems that occur when teams with small numbers don't get as much funding, and it's also a mainstay when it comes to funding really big projects (like, for example, a spiffy new all-weather track). I think it works well because it's driven by concerned individuals expressing a need, rather than an outsider's preception of what the need is. The association also has completely open membership, so it's not a few cronies channeling money to their favorite sports, either. I recommend it highly as a very good working model.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:27 PM on September 28, 2004
Not sure what to say. Regardless of his son's results or his continuing involvement, at least the school will have the facilities going forward. And there are worse things that the guy could spend money and time on. Guess mainly it rubs me (and obviously other Americans) as anti-populist, flaunting his wealth for very personal gain. Oh well.