Press "Enter" to skip to content

Knight Law School’s "Football and Conflict" trivia classes

2/15/2013 Note: This post has a record number of comments, which have raised many issues in addition to those in the post. I want to apologize for the personal pain this post has caused for the instructors in the CNC program. As I’ve written in the comments, I think it would be a good thing for UO to have a course or two on sports and conflict. I’ve thought about teaching a course in sports economics myself. The law school now has a professor teaching sports law. These are all reasonable things for a university to teach. But 10 courses on this narrow subject are far too many. Upper division courses should have prerequisites, and tenure track faculty with research interests in the subject should be teaching at least some of them. This goes double for courses with graduate level credit. I think the CNC program has been mismanaged by the Law School, and that ultimately means by the Dean, Michael Moffitt.

2/10/2013: Back in 2008 ODE reporter Allie Grasgreen wrote about Pat Kilkenny’s $1 million gift to support UO’s academic side:

University President Dave Frohnmayer announced the Kilkennys’ gift at a press conference Thursday. Frohnmayer called the donation “an extraordinary gift from an extraordinary couple.” …

The $1 million donation will establish two academic programs. The first is “Competition Not Conflict,” which will feature classes within the Knight Law Center that focus on conflict resolution in sports. 

“We had years where this was just to us a good idea,” said School of Law associate professor Michael Moffitt, “and it is now with the Kilkennys’ gift that this can be more than just a good idea.”

After a few trial years, Kilkenny’s good idea came up for faculty review last month. The UO Senate Committee on Courses rejected every single course – unanimously:

Why did the faculty reject these courses? Consider CRES 410: “Football and Conflict”, conveniently taught in Room 101 of the Jaqua Center for Student-Athletes – or, as the NY Times calls it, “UO’s Jock Box”. The law school has been giving out 4 upper division undergraduate credits for this course, despite the fact it has no prerequisites. They’ll even give you graduate credits for it. They took tuition money from 89 students for this last fall. And what did those students learn? A UO Matters operative retrieved the final exam from the Jock Box dumpster:

Try your luck on the full 45 football trivia questions here. Kilkenny’s program also includes:

and this spring you can take

Sign up soon, because I’ve got a feeling it’s going to be a long, long time before the Law school lets these courses get taught again.

In totally unrelated news, Kilkenny’s “Lucky Duck” foundation has now given a total of $570,000 to Frohnmayer’s Fanconi Foundation. The timeline?

Year         Gift         Notes
2005 $0
2006  $240K  Kilkenny gives UO $2M to buy out longtime AD Bill Moos
2007 $100K Frohnmayer appoints Kilkenny as AD
                                Frohnmayer lets Kilkenny piss away UO money on baseball
2008 $100K Frohnmayer gets Matt Court Arena bonds through legislature
2009 $50K Frohnmayer retires and Kilkenny leaves as AD
                                Kilkenny invests in new apartment buildings next to Matt Court
2010 $80K Bellotti scandal
2011  ?
2012       ?
2013       ?

IRS 990 here. For 2006:

And Dean Moffitt still seems in denial about what’s really going with this program: In the NYT a day after I posted this:

At the University of Oregon, Michael Moffitt, the law school’s dean, has started clinics on nonprofit groups, environmental policy and probate mediation. He has also set up law courses for students in other parts of the university, which brings revenue to the law school. 

“The problem is that we have been selling only one product,” Mr. Moffitt said. “But if you are getting a business degree, you need to know about contract law. City planners need to know about land-use law. So we at Oregon are educating not just J.D. students. 

“Demand is through the roof,” he added. “I feel like I am living a business school case study.” 

And what kind of life could top that? But go to the list of classes the law school is offering to undergraduates, here. About 250 students are enrolled in the kinds of solid courses Moffitt tells the NYT about. But 300 are in Kilkenny’s sports conflict courses. Probably a good idea not telling the Times that little detail. (Thanks to Anon for tip in the comments.) 2/11/2013.


  1. Anonymous 02/10/2013

    This is so embarrassing. It never ends around here.

    (Do we have a consensus answer to #2?)

    • Anonymous 02/10/2013

      Of course, the tkae away for the admins will be something like “Don’t leave your final exams lying around in the Jock Box.” Hell, it was probably my fault for grabbing it and I should have immediately turned it over to authorities for fear that people would find out what a pathetic waste of time the class is. It’s all my fault. Does anyone know Gottfredson’s confession hours? (If they ever respond to the public-records request for his official schedule maybe we’ll find out.)

  2. Anonymous 02/10/2013

    Embarrassing indeed. Obviously looks bad for the admins but what about the profs? Don’t they have any self respect?

    • Anonymous 02/10/2013

      The profs are all adjuncts, willing (apparently) to teach anything to make ends meet. Adult supervision from the capital-P Profs in the Law School was obviously lacking, though.

    • Tragedy or Farce? 02/10/2013

      Michael Moffitt was an associate professor in 2010 when he bought into this. Now he’s the law school dean, making $270,000. Any more questions?

    • Anonymous 02/10/2013

      Good ideas like this get you invited on the bowl game junkets. Get a clue, science PI’s!

  3. Anonymous 02/10/2013

    You know the Jaqua tutors already have the key. But is anyone else willing to give it a try?

    • Anonymous 02/10/2013

      Sorry, I’m waiting for the “Baseball and Conflict” exam.

  4. marmot 02/10/2013

    Maybe the administration and the athletic department should be thanking the Senate CoC for rescuing them from the inevitable scandal a few years down the road if this had gone through.

    Also, I thought you needed to name a TTF who will teach a course when you apply to the CoC to move from an experimental designation (399, 410, etc.) to a permanent course. Was there a TTF’s name on the applications, or was that the grounds for rejection?

  5. Anonymous 02/10/2013

    nietzsche and hobbes would be stunned at the amount of Miami hate on that test.

    the CNC webpage having a quote from NCAA ex-honcho Brand about “what values you’re representing” sort of defeats the purpose of the program, given the NCAA seems to thrive on useless conflict.

  6. Anonymous 02/10/2013

    And why is the Law school suddenly do interested in undergraduate “education”?

    Oh yeah, the budget model that rewards this type of crap.

    It’s not just happening there. Look around.

    Kudos to the COC for doing their job. Lesson here – when faculty take their role over academic matters seriously, stuff gets fixed. When admins are left to their own devices, stupid stuff gets implemented.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      Also pay attention to the number of undergraduate law classes the Law School is now teaching……Environmental Law etc….the budget model drives all.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      plenty of other departments around campus are pulling similar scams. check the Ed School, they are experts.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      AAD is also very popular – and they count for gen ed.

  7. Anonymous 02/10/2013

    I notice that Lisa Wolverton, who nixed these courses, herself gives a course on “The Cultural History of Dogs” (Hist 199).

    • Anonymous 02/10/2013

      Course titles can often mask the seriousness of a curriculum, though. That’s actually a thoughtful class, as far as I can tell. In truth, I could imagine putting together a thoughtful class on football and conflict, too. The issue is that in this case, ‘football and conflict’ appears to have been bogus.

      Admission… The cultural history of dogs actually sound interesting to me. I’ve often wondered why we don’t eat them, for example.

    • Anonymous 02/10/2013

      Just one course? Looks like the law school could spin that into an entire new major: “Rottweilers and athletes”, “The common law and dog bites”, “Canines, contracts, and the courts”, “Terriers and Torts”, …

    • Publius 02/10/2013

      Courses on sports and conflict are not trivial. Several years ago, Mac Court witnessed a serious racial incident at the high school championship; that same year, a parent was killed by another parent at an Oregon high school football game; violence has increased in k-12 sports, especially among girls. Conflict in sports tracks almost every social problem, especially race and gender. Trivializing these issues, as the previous remark does, ignores the problematic role of sports in society

    • Anonymous 02/10/2013

      There’s a difference between declaring social conflict that arises in the context of sport “trivial”–which none of the above posters did–and noting that these courses on “sports and conflict”–to judge by the exam–emphasize the trivial.

    • Lisa Wolverton 02/10/2013

      The original anonymous here misunderstands the excerpt from the minutes UOMatters provided: I did not personally “nix” these courses; they were assigned to me to present to the committee, which then voted 0-6 to reject them. We have explained to the CNC and Law School faculty the reasoning behind that decision.

      As for the Cultural History of Dogs, that is a 3-credit Freshman Seminar (vetted therefore by their curriculum committee), and the syllabus is here:

    • Publius 02/11/2013

      I have been on the course committee four times over the years, and it was always understood that issues like this were not meant for public debate, involving as they do details of curricula, etc. Now that the current committee has made it a public issue, perhaps Lisa could tell us her views on the seriousness of the sports-conflict issue, as a matter of academic concern. Does it match the seriousness of comic books, which the English Dept has a whole program to study?

    • UO Matters 02/11/2013

      The Senate CoC is admirably transparent. They post detailed instructions for submitting courses, schedules, and minutes of their meetings at

      This is where I got the information used in this post (except the exam from the trash).

      The minutes for the 1/18 meeting at which the CNC courses were rejected say:

      CRES & LAW: There was a lengthy discussion on the Law courses submitted for the CNC certificate program. There were questions
      regarding all courses with concerns including low reading loads, assignments, discrepancy between narrative and syllabi, soccer reading
      load, definitions not clear for current events and creative research project, no differentials for CRES courses, using graduate students as
      teaching assistants, and how courses work with Kidsports. UOCC voted on all of the courses and all courses were rejected. Lisa will contact
      the School of Law and offer assistance.

      This seems pretty clear cut.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      The Cultural History of Dogs indeed. This is why undergraduate degrees no longer indicate the ability to think, write, and speak coherently. Perhaps the Dream Act should have exempted such courses from in-state tuition – for anyone.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      I thought White Fang was a pretty good book. What’s wrong with teaching it in college?

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      Can’t say. Never read White Fang…or studied conflict in sports either.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      The whole dog issue is a red herring. That’s one class for 25 students. By comparison, we’re talking about a whole roster of these Law School courses, a dozen or more, most with high enrollments. One of them is called–no kidding!–“Dealing with an Angry Sports Public”. That’s a webinar for security guards, no? The Football exam is an indicator of the caliber of these courses. There are a lot of students at stake in this Sports Conflict thing, as well as major issues of faculty responsibility. Let’s not get distracted by an intellectual discourse on the merits of White Fang.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      I don’t know. Is it?

  8. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    Lisa Wolverton’s dog seminar devotes two sessions to “Lassie Come Home”, according to her syllabus. I suppose this is more serious than the study of Bear Bryant, though it probably depends what part of the country you are from.

    • UO Matters 02/11/2013

      Clearly there is only one person who can resolve this. Where’s Dog?

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      Dog on Cultural History of Dogs

      This dog is unaware that we even have a cultural history. In general, dogs are usually in a constant state of reprimand (in the dog house), undervalued as functioning creatures, often told to eat shit and die and generally are forced to retrieve frisbees in the midst of oncoming traffic. A dog’s life sucks for the most part – no one should be a dog.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      Dog is tastier than Cat, I hear, or Three-Toed Sloth for that matter.

  9. Delta House 02/11/2013

    I’m still waiting for someone to post the answer key. Don’t any fraternity brothers read this blog?

  10. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    Which Kilkenny gift was worse for UO: CNC or Paul Westhead?

  11. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    Frohnmayer sold out the Law School too? That’s some stone cold shit.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      No. I’m not sure how you’d even conclude that based on the above facts.

    • Anonymous 03/13/2013

      Whaaa? How on earth did you come up with that? Too? What??

  12. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    This would be a really interesting story if even 1% of it were based on fact. Great story. Wrong. But, really, a great piece of fiction.

    • Zach 02/11/2013

      In that case, it shouldn’t be too hard for you to name a few specific falsehoods.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      It’s easy to find real information. Try reaching out to the folks who have insight – real insight.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Interesting FACT. Not one person on the CoC has looked at one piece of teaching material beyond the syllabi or the one exam they stole from a blind professor forced to do multiple choice questions because they wouldn’t honor a request for someone to read and transcribe exams to him. Not one interview or question EVER. They have never attended a class. I bet you could go to any of the classes offered this term and see for yourself if they are legit but then folks would have to get off their asses and walk somewhere and that wouldn’t be as good a story as these lies if you found out these were great, challenging courses, right?

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Hello, large out-of-court settlement!

  13. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    “In totally unrelated news, Kilkenny’s “Lucky Duck” foundation has now given a total of $530,000 to Frohnmayer’s Fanconi Foundation. The IRS 990’s don’t give exact dates, but it appears most of this was the year or two before Dave appointed him AD, in 2008″

    You are an absolute liar and disgusting human being. You know this is a lie. Kilkenny’s gifts had NOTHING to do with his being AD. I’ve pointed this out numerous times. Say whatever you want about Frohnmayer (and everything else you’ve said is a lie, too), but exploiting an awful, personal tragedy as part of your smear campaign is despicable.

    • UO Matters 02/11/2013

      I’d be interested in hearing more about the ineffectiveness of these gifts – you seem very well informed.

    • UO Matters 02/11/2013

      I’m sure it’s coincidence that Kilkenny’s generous gifts dropped off as soon as Frohnmayer was no longer in a position to influence how much of UO’s academic money went the athletic department.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      Decent president from 1995 to 2000, then he let Davis and Moseley run things for a while, then they retired, he cashed out, and things fell apart quick.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      If it’s a lie, Anon, why did you so quickly draw the same conclusion from those facts that the rest of us did? And why did you think that might bolster your argument’s persuasiveness?

  14. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    I’m the anonymous poster above, responding to these four “responses.”

    I’m not going to argue this point. I’ve done that already. It’s sufficient to say that you, Bill, are a disturbed person who has no regard for truth, human decency, or the depth of tragedy that’s befallen both Kilkenny and Frohnmayer and their families. I resent you more than words could ever express.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      What you quoted and posted:

      “”In totally unrelated news, Kilkenny’s “Lucky Duck” foundation has now given a total of $530,000 to Frohnmayer’s Fanconi Foundation. The IRS 990’s don’t give exact dates, but it appears most of this was the year or two before Dave appointed him AD, in 2008″

      You are an absolute liar and disgusting human being. You know this is a lie.”

      What part of that statement, which is making a factual assertion about amounts and timelines, is in fact a lie? Nowhere does it state “Kilkenny made the donation in exchange for becoming athletic director, that’s you’re own interpretation of events apparently.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      “What part of that statement, which is making a factual assertion about amounts and timelines, is in fact a lie? Nowhere does it state “Kilkenny made the donation in exchange for becoming athletic director, that’s you’re own interpretation of events apparently.”

      My own interpretation of this post is that you’re (btw, note correct usage of “you’re”) a dolt.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      How does it feel to walk the plank for Frohnmayer and Kilkenny over and over again?

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      “How does it feel to walk the plank for Frohnmayer and Kilkenny over and over again?”

      I’m not sure I understand your metaphor in this context.

  15. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    Also, to this poster:

    “If it’s a lie, Anon, why did you so quickly draw the same conclusion from those facts that the rest of us did? And why did you think that might bolster your argument’s persuasiveness?”

    I just have to say that you’re a massive tool; that’s all.

  16. Not legal advice 02/11/2013

    Oregon’s ethics law has a loophole for contributions to a charitable cause, so Frohnmayer is on sound ground legally. However the donations and subsequent appointment, followed by Frohnmayer’s zeal in implementing Kilkenny’s various athletic projects, certainly creates the appearance of a conflict of interest. That is something to be avoided.

    • UO Matters 02/11/2013

      The Gates Foundation COI rules are on the first google page:

      Things that should be “avoided or disclosed”:

      ƒ”Other business relationships and dealings: Approving grants or contracts with organizations
      in which you or your family have a significant financial or other interest or relationship,
      particularly if you are in a position to influence major decisions, are responsible for review,
      negotiation and approval of the grants or contracts, or otherwise direct the foundation’s
      business dealings with that business or entity.”

  17. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    A propos of this post. Michal Moffitt quoted in February 11 NYT article on Law Schools:
    Elsewhere in the country, law schools are trying to deal with declining popularity in a range of ways. The University of Akron Law School in Ohio has frozen its tuition and virtually ended its out-of-state surcharge. At the University of Oregon, Michael Moffitt, the law school’s dean, has started clinics on nonprofit groups, environmental policy and probate mediation. He has also set up law courses for students in other parts of the university, which brings revenue to the law school.

    “The problem is that we have been selling only one product,” Mr. Moffitt said. “But if you are getting a business degree, you need to know about contract law. City planners need to know about land-use law. So we at Oregon are educating not just J.D. students.

    “Demand is through the roof,” he added. “I feel like I am living a business school case study.”

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Living a business school case study… too bad he’s not performing like a law school Dean.

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Seriously, years ago we could have had Kevin Johnson (now Dean of a top 30 law school) and thus retained Garrett Epps, Steve Bender, Keith Aoki (RIP), Robert Tsai, and who knows who else – not to mention who we could have attracted! Instead, UO Law dropped like a stone in the US News rankings and has never come back. How the hell did this guy get to be Dean?

  18. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    I hope there will be more clarity about who designed the sports-related courses in question.

  19. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    Given Dean Moffitt’s national reputation in conflict resolution, what exactly are you attributing to him in this matter?

  20. UO Matters 02/11/2013

    I’m accusing him of “living in a business school case study”. One of those ones where a business decides to dilute quality and depreciate their hard won national reputation, to cash in on short-run profits.

    This is not a slam on his school’s move towards solid undergrad courses in law for non-lawyers, which I think is a great idea both in terms of practical knowledge and in terms of educating informed citizens.

    It’s just a criticism of what I’ve seen of the CNC sports conflict program.

  21. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    Don’t forget the part of the timeline where Kilkenny gave Frohnmayer the money to buy out Moos’s contract.

    • UO Matters 02/11/2013

      Thanks, added.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013


    • UO Matters 02/11/2013

      Hmm, maybe this sports and conflict stuff is a bigger problem than I’d thought. I’ll have to get cousin Jim’s opinion on the above.

    • Anonymous 02/11/2013

      Just shut the fuck up, Bill.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      Is that Geller with the attitude? Maybe Frohnmayer? Man they can get hot and bothered like children.

  22. Anonymous 02/11/2013

    You don’t write directly that Kilkenney made gifts to the FA Research Fund in exchange for becoming AD, but that despicable implication is apparent in all that you have written on this subject. The truth is heart-wrenching and tragic – stuff you are incapable of comprehending. The fact is that Kilkenney knows three families well who are afflicted with FA: his neighbor’s child in Hepner, his fraternity brother’s two children (one of whom died from this disease) and the Frohnmayers (who have lost two children to FA). Deeply moved by the tragedies that afflicted all three families, Pat Kilkenney and his wife have selflessly, generously devoted time and personal resources to support research into this devastating disorder. The fantasy tie to the AD position is a figment of your pathetic imagination.

    FYI: Kilkenney’s personal gifts in support of the FA Research Fund have increased considerably each year over the past 3 years. Frohnmayer has not been UO President since 2009. Find another theory, idiot.

    • Idiot 02/12/2013

      Thanks for this useful information. Mine came from the IRS 990 forms. Do you have a source for your statements about the increases in Mr. Kilkenny’s donations?

      Also, I assume you’ve heard rumors that Phil Knight stopped his large FA donations after Frohnmayer opposed him on having UO join the WRC in 2000. Any numbers and dates on his contributions would be appreciated, since you seem to have some inside knowledge.

      The sorts of donations in the 990’s, and which you describe, certainly create the appearance of a COI. It would have been good practice for President Frohnmayer to have disclosed them and perhaps recused himself from decisions regarding Kilkenny. Many institutions would have required this – e.g. the Gates Foundation.

      It’s too late for that here, of course, but a little sunshine might serve as a good post-hoc remedy of sorts, along the idea of what Mandela would call “truth and then reconciliation”.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      Mr “You don’t write directly that K…”
      You seem less than savvy, or a tad gullible. You think generosity and selfishness can’t coexist do you? You must live in a wonderfully ignorant headspace, Sir.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      I’m not the above poster, but I know what he/she is referencing.

      To Bill–stfu, as I said before.

      (btw, to those who think I’m being cruel/curt with Billy Boy: I’m not actually this big of a jerk, but all of the information/points he’s raised on this issue have been discussed with him ad nauseum previously, to no avail, so I’m done with actual dialogue)

      To Anonymous–you’re wrong. Of course generosity and selfishness can coexist, but PK didn’t even want the AD job. The Administration pursued him. There was literally no ulterior motive behind his donations. I’m not saying the possibility is unreasonable, but the fact that Kilkenny didn’t even earn a salary as AD should probably have given you some pause about his alleged “selfishness.”

    • UO Matters 02/12/2013

      Pat Kilkenny is a saint. And now the Pope job is opening up.

      Come on, he gave up a little salary, kept the health benefits, and then got the academic side to pay for millions of dollars in hidden subsidies for the Ducks. What else do you think that secret MOU they signed just before they both left was all about? Lots of fun for him and the other boosters, at our expense.

    • UO Matters 02/12/2013

      Thanks for the memories, added to the timeline.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      You’re welcome. But now I “shut the fuck up”.

      PS: Though he got us a really good basketball coach…

  23. Anonymous 02/12/2013

    The pay-for-play is easy to decipher here: Kilkenny got the AD gig through donations to Frohnmayer and by paying for Moos’ buyout, then he used that position to establish the baseball program he personally wanted.

    • UO Matters 02/12/2013

      Oh yes, baseball. The $5 million on the balloon loan for Kilkenny Park that the Foundation put in is due in a few years. Some gift.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      Which brings us right back to “Baseball and Conflict”…

  24. Anonymous 02/12/2013

    And why is his name all over fucking everything? Here’s a guy who didn’t earn a degree and didn’t do anything worthy of having his name all over the place. he managed to make a lot of money – so what? That’s what we value?

    If it really wasn’t about him why didn’t he demand they not put his name on stuff? Why not name it after his neighbors child. This was at least some big ego play.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      Cuz it’s nice to get recognized when you spend millions of dollars of your own money on something, perhaps?

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      That was in response to a previous post about this not being about Kilkenny’s ego. So, you made my point. Thanks. Again, he gave some money – big fucking deal.

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      Hey Bro, you seem cool and edgy, try this: work in Development for a foundation, and every time you talk to really rich people, say, “We want you to donate many millions of dollars to this project. But we’re not going to attach your name to it, even though it’s a sizable portion of the project’s total cost, because we don’t believe in inflating people’s egos.”

      Report back. Good luck, Bro.

    • UO Matters 02/13/2013

      Or, as Mandeville said,

      Pride and Vanity have built more Hospitals than all the Virtues together.

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      That’s why I don’t work in development, bro (really, “bro”?).

      You’ve missed the point but that’s ok. I’ll let you see if you can figure out how you missed the point. There’s a lot to read so take your time.

      Report back and good luck bro.

    • Roger 02/13/2013

      “Bro” Bro here.

      “That was in response to a previous post about this not being about Kilkenny’s ego. So, you made my point. Thanks. Again, he gave some money – big fucking deal.”

      To which post is that referring?

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      Keep trying – I know it’s a lot to comprehend but you can do it.

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      To “hey Bro”

      Actually, there use to be a rule that you did not put names of living people on building so hopefully the do not get caught is some embarrassing scandal and you have to change the name of the building and give back the money as in Grayson, er, Willamette. For the most part Phil has been held to this.

      Also with many of these buildings I do not think I heard a great cry for a baseball stadium or a golf course for that matter. Autzen is still Autzen and there are still a few of us who think that Mac is the real deal and better than Matt partly BECAUSE you can’t host Monster Trucks and do not need to because the building is paid for. Unless you get someone to mortgage it and have the students pay for it.

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      I thought many of this University’s plans were contingent on private donations, making the “Again, he gave some money – big fucking deal.” perspective highly suspect.

    • Roger 02/13/2013

      “Keep trying – I know it’s a lot to comprehend but you can do it.”

      I don’t know what you’re talking about because I have no idea which “Anonymous” posts you made before. I’m also not sure which post was about “this not being about Kilkenny’s ego” because no other posts besides yours mention “Kilkenny’s ego.” Are you talking about the athletic donations or the FARF donations?

      Also, your attempts at condescension are really, really bad.

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      Would Mandeville have categorized US pork barrel community hospital construction as Pride and Vanity?

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Roger, you don’t get it and that’s fine. I don’t need you to. Moving on..

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Sorry Roger, one more thing. (You are cracking me up by the way).

      What exactly is “good” condescension, BRO?

    • Roger 02/14/2013

      OK, Cool.

      I’ll clarify why I was asking. The only thing that interests me is whether you’re either of these two Anons:

      “‘Mr “You don’t write directly that K…’
      You seem less than savvy, or a tad gullible. You think generosity and selfishness can’t coexist do you? You must live in a wonderfully ignorant headspace, Sir.”


      “The pay-for-play is easy to decipher here: Kilkenny got the AD gig through donations to Frohnmayer and by paying for Moos’ buyout, then he used that position to establish the baseball program he personally wanted.”

      If you’re not, then I don’t care what your point(s) is/are, and I wish you nothing but the absolute best in life.

    • Roger 02/14/2013

      Actually, I changed my mind; please take no offense at the fact that I’m no longer interested in this conversation.

      If you are the author of either of the above two comments, I implore you not to express opinions on topics about which you have no knowledge whatsoever.

      If you’re not, I merely leave you with my opinion that your point about Kilkenny and his “ego” and what is “all about him” is highly sophomoric.

      Peace be with you.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      That must be “good” condescension. Good one bro.

      But you still missed the point entirely.

    • Roger 02/14/2013

      If I misunderstood you, I apologize. Why don’t you explain your point again?

  25. A lady 02/12/2013

    Wow! Go near Kilkenny (and his spawn, CNC)… and it gets really ugly here. Must be because “sports is more complicated than academic subjects like physics.” But how about all you boys watch the bad language and name calling?!

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      A mere mention of “sports and conflict” and look how the Kilkenny vitriol rolls. Stunning, but not unexpected. Maybe it’s because when the NCAA gets down to business later this spring, Kilkenny’s tenure (and some of the athletic associates of his time) will be seen as booster-donor assistance/influence against the rules? UOM hates the NCAA but maybe in this instance he should do a double take.

    • UO Matters 02/12/2013

      Hmm, Kilkenny or the NCAA. That would be a tough call. And it sounds like you know something. Spill it, you’ll feel better.

  26. Anonymous 02/12/2013

    “Hmm, Kilkenny or the NCAA. That would be a tough call.”

    Ooh, I’m just giddy with anticipation at what the wise ol’ Bill Harbaugh thinks about that. Oh wait. Actually, you’re a jackass, Harbaugh, and your opinion is worthless, especially on Pat Kilkenny–someone who’s done more for the UO than you could ever fathom.

    • Anonymous 02/12/2013

      Name what he has done that is “more than we can fathom”. He gave money and put his name on some shit – big fucking deal.

      Wasn’t he also part of the Belloti fiasco that cost UO millions?

  27. Anonymous 02/12/2013

    Lost amidst all the caterwauling about Kilkenny is the simple fact that the system worked — belatedly, accidentally almost, but it worked. A rogue program was shot down by a duly constituted faculty committee. The questions now are (a) whether the law school will try to resurrect it, and (b) what other rogue operations are out there not getting noticed.

    • UO Matters 02/12/2013

      I agree.

  28. Anonymous 02/12/2013

    Welcome to Oregon Community College at Eugene.

  29. UO Matters 02/12/2013

    Nearly a hundred downloads of the complete “Football and Conflict” final exam trivia questions. No one has sent me answers. Come on people!

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      Sorry, it was too hard.

    • Anonymous 02/13/2013

      dog says

      Not too hard but way too ambiguous. In many cases the right answer should be None of the Above. The test itself I think is an interesting case of sociology and Good vs Evil.

      Vince Lombardi GOOD
      U. Miami EVIL

      obviously its a bizarre test.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Well, that one was easy but…

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Not much interest in piling on. Go figure.

  30. Anonymous 02/12/2013

    That’s the spirit! Kill, Pussycat, Kill!

  31. Anonymous 02/14/2013

    YOU ALL HAVE TOO MUCH TIME ON YOUR HANDS! Get a life! instead of wasting your time complaining about this or making fun of the program or class go out and do something that actually matters or maybe go exercise its good for you.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Yet here you are.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      only because this whole issue was brought to my attention today so I wanted to check it out for myself and you are all ruining someones life right now and its not right.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      I agree that a more charitable approach to the issue and the people involved would be appropriate.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Ruining someone’s life? You don’t think there are life-altering implications associated with these issues, for students? for student athletes? for the research that gets don’t around here?
      Open eyes.. anytime now would be good.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      No. No. No.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      the professor who teaches the football class, yes his life has been altered because he cares a lot about the course and is passionate about his career and to have some ignorant person make his class seem like a joke is horrible. It just sucks for someone who has put so much into something and then have it all put on blast. But you guys can all say and think what you want, just remember someone worked hard to put together that class and cares a lot about it and now it is getting stepped all over.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      This medium tends to bring out the worst in people. Your comment suggests it may bring out the best, as well.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      I think this medium is awful and its makes me sick to my stomach to watch a professor who has such a great heart and cares so much about his studies to be scrutinized this way. This professor who is being targeted has been put in a negative spot light for no reason except for the fact that whoever started this particular blog has some issues that he/she is addressing in the wrong way. Don’t displace your own problems onto to an innocent person who has done nothing wrong and is being treated as if he did.

    • UO Matters 02/14/2013

      One or two classes on sports conflict would be a good thing. But the people who run this got greedy and tried to make a whole program out of it. Nine courses? Upper division courses with MC tests and no pre-reqs? The law school should have kept them under control, but didn’t. So the CoC did the job for them. Good work.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Hunt whale, not tuna. When you catch a dolphin, cut the net.

    • UO Matters 02/14/2013

      Will whoever is posting these pithy comments start using a consistent screen name? I suggest Ahab.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      Call me Ishmael.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      this is addressed to UO Matters: I agree with you in that there should be pre-reqs, but attacking a single professor with his course is wrong. Stating that the exams given in the class are easy is also wrong and false because those exams are not easy they are actually hard. The exam should be easy if you go to class, do the readings and understand the concepts on the class. You can’t judge a class based off the title. The classes are not just about sports, they actually relate to other issues. Second the class is not for just student-athletes in fact there are typically a MAX of five students in these classes. Majority of these classes are full are students, non-athletes. Clearly who every UO Matter is has a deeper issue and is taking it out on a professor who actually genuinely cares and loves his studies. If you have such an issue with the program go to the CNC office and talk to Josh Gordon about it, don’t ostracize one persons course and his studies.

    • UO Matters 02/14/2013

      Sorry, but 45 multiple choice questions, mostly about sports trivia, do not make for an acceptable final exam for an upper-division course. And there are ~8 other similar courses in the program?

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      It is rather touching to observe the loyalty of some students from Football and Conflict, but quite obviously what constitutes appropriate evaluation is determined by the faculty. We know a poorly-written, too-easy test when we see one; and we know too what it says about the course overall.

      In fact, the point is that all of this stuff is subject to faculty oversight. It should have happened within the Law School itself; failing that, problems that should have been corrected much earlier have been exposed now. Alas, this happened publicly–because university committees do not operate in secret unless their mandate dictates it. Had the Law Faculty done it’s job, none of this would have happened.

    • Anonymous 02/14/2013

      And, correct me if my recollection is wrong but the genesis of this is interesting. As I recall, Kilkenny was taking public heat for not having a degree and subsequently decided to donate some money to fund an “academic” program – presumably to raise his “academic” credibility. Apparently, he couldn’t bring himself to not have this donation relate to something other than sports (or maybe there was another motive) so we got this.

      I suspect it grew as a natural response to the budget model but I could be wrong about that too.

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Regardless of how you explain yourself, you are wrong for ostracizing one professor and one class. Your words and actions have been extremely hurtful and the way this is being handled in immature. You have no idea the amount of emotional pain and destruction you have caused for one person.

    • UO Matters 02/15/2013

      Yes, Law School Dean Michael Moffitt certainly has a lot to answer for here. I hope he is seriously re-evaluating his decisions and actions regarding his handling of the CNC program and these courses.

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Yes, people should attack more than one professor… I’m sure there are many doing similar things. (Give it time, give it time… as long as the behavior continues, each will have his or her day.)

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Bill, it might be worth digging around a bit. A poor, overworked (apparently blind????) adjunct getting hammered for how he had to teach these classes (enormous enrollments, teaching many more classes than TTF do) isn’t much of a story – that is, unless you’re concerned with labor relations and ADA law. But Moffitt’s involvement in starting it and raising money for it? In letting this thing grow while he is/was Dean of a “business school case study” (aka law school)? The law school benefiting from it all? (i.e. adjuncts and non-faculty teaching enormous classes) Maybe there’s more than meets the eye? What was Moffitt’s role in Kilkenny putting up the money for CnC? Were any OUS members involved?

    • UO Matters 02/15/2013

      Anonymous, if you’ve got something to tell, just spill it.

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      perspectives are offered, facts are discovered.

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Assume the people involved acted out of good will. Apologize for any personal pain you have caused.
      Clarify that you acted out of principle.
      You don’t have to hurt people to make a point.

    • UO Matters 02/15/2013

      point taken, explanation added.

  32. Anonymous 02/14/2013

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.
    Mark Twain
    US humorist, novelist, short story author, & wit (1835 – 1910)

  33. Anonymous 02/15/2013

    The conspiracy is bigger than we all thought

    CNC has bribed newspapers around the country to fake sports conflict

    Must be kikklenyy $$$

    • Anonymous 02/15/2013

      Nice facebook page. Just the sort of peer-reviewed research that UO needs.

  34. Anonymous 02/15/2013

    I wonder, could PK pass that test?

  35. Anonymous 02/17/2013

    Surely Michael Moffitt made sure the law school had a robust curriculum review process and a committee in place before engaging in this expansion into teaching undergraduate courses. Right? Anyone?

    • Anonymous 02/17/2013

      Uh, define “robust”…

  36. Anonymous 02/17/2013

    The test appears to reflect many cultural issues that represent the objectives of the CNC: “provide[] opportunities for theory and practice in understanding, preventing, and resolving conflict in the competitive sports arena.” Viewing the test in isolation from the discussions that generated the answers ‘trivializes’ the subject absent any inquiry (I would imagine that there was a discussion on how people are valued in an organization when the cost of a left tackle was brought up; or perhaps I’m wrong and only a spreadsheet of salaries and positions was presented to the students). While Chuck Bednarik may be a bit of trivia, tell me a prof that hasn’t used entertaining or interesting anecdotes during a lecture and I’ll show you puddles of drool on desktops. It is apparent that this community, OP included, does not believe sport is a legitimate educational lens in which cultural values may be reflected or improved upon (despite protestations that ‘I was once interested in sports’). Ironically, it is the familiarity with the subject that seems the root of the disdain: “how can something have any academic legitimacy if ESPN does a ’30 for 30′ on it?” I challenge OP to present a multiple guess test addressing compensation choices of women within their menstrual cycle that doesn’t elicit similar titters from this audience: “If a smart woman is bleeding and she is presented with a dumb man will she choose a) tournament b) piece c) crying d) both a) & b) or e) none of the above.” OP adopts the typical medialoid tactics of bloggers everywhere: become angry at some perceived slight or injustice; indiscriminately project anger absent thought, inquiry, or concern; revel in the attention as keeper of all that is good and holy. “I am the paragon of academia! Only I have the ability to dictate the number of courses appropriate for a program!!” While I am in agreement with many of the disparagements of the administration, it is cowardice to appropriate materials from a peer (a peer regardless of your denigrations to the contrary), and then post that material without inquiry or discussion with that peer as to whether the material actually reflects your hypothesis. Perhaps you come to the same conclusion regardless, but at least you come to them as a man. Instead, it looks like you may have succeeded in getting tag banned from the playground. That, and perhaps cost a very popular and passionate educator the ability to provide for his family. Bravo sir. Bravo.

    • Bluto 02/17/2013

      “While I am in agreement with many of the disparagements of the administration,”

      Wouldn’t you have to assume that this blogger’s methods are applied uniformly, both to the administration and the CNC program?

    • CPC3 02/17/2013

      I attempt to avoid assumption whenever possible. As to the methods, it would appear that in evaluating the administration OP uses empirical data obtained from formal requests to question motives and means. Further, those who choose to enter an administrative role choose to do so subject to statute, rule, and regulation that provide for public oversight.
      Here, there is a question as to how ‘honestly’ the material criticized was obtained. In addition, while those who choose to enter the role of an educator are too subject to some public oversight, that transparency is different in nature and substance to that of the administrator.
      OP is certainly free to have his opinions about the value of a particular discipline. He is certainly free to gripe about the source of financing for that discipline. But when he holds himself out as an academician and assaults a subject without inquiry into that subject, he does himself and the community a disservice. Moreover, when he impeaches the reputation of another educator he does actual damage. He is entitled to do so but it does not create the best avenue toward insight and growth.

    • Bluto 02/18/2013

      “Moreover, when he impeaches the reputation of another educator he does actual damage.”

      And “impeaching” the reputation of administrators doesn’t do damage?

    • CPC3 02/18/2013

      I don’t know. You tell me. Does it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *