I think what you may have here is a severe case of goal displacement. Apparently, in MS universities are rewarded based on the number of students enrolled. The admin. emphasizes this frequently...our goal is to reach 20,000 students...concerned about MBA enrollment...compete with Univ of Phoenix (what? in quality? no...number of students). The "system" rewards the admin based on number of students...not educational quality. An MS is not alone in this respect.
As I recall, Ole Miss has said it did not want to grow any more, that their current enrollment was optimum. Not an exact quote. Of course, they have a chancellor who understands quality - so perhaps it is not fair to compare them to USM.
The IHL state "formula" for allocating appropriations to the 8 universities (3 too many might I add !) has been "tweaked" and "manipulated" in the past years to redistribute funds from USM to Mississippi State, primarily, and to a lesser extent, Alcorn. I have seen the data.
In some ways, we at USM think Ole Miss always gains, but the numbers show that MSU is the one being "subsidized."
I guess it is just "coincidence" that the IHL has recently been dominated by more MSU influence with "ties" to other regional and African American delta power blocks.
SFT does not seem to care, and we all know that AKL didn't. Flemming did but look where it got him, not to mention that he was not to the liking of other interest groups and power brokers or that he was often not up to par (got to call a spade a spade).
When can USM have a real president, like Ole Miss.