Why do universities have football teams, anyway?

Football =Dead loss Financially (0.00 / 0)

There have been several studies done showing when all costs are accounted for thatCollege football is a financial loss for 95% of the colleges. The exceptions being teams such as Notre Dame and other teams with schools attached who have a separate TV deal, are in a big market ( LA -USC).

The way most schools claim a profit is the same way Enron was "profitable" they cook the books.

Examples abound of trainers who are listed and paid at 30% for football with the rest of the salary being paid by other programs they are suppose to work on but don't.

Stadium usage is only charged out for game days even though they would not be needed except for football so maintence etc. is paid for out of the General maintence fund not the Football program.

Extra insurance to cover accidents to fans or attendees areoften just folded into the general Stadium insurance not the football program.

Add to this these days of million dollar football coaches and hidden sudsidies of tax deductions for donations to the football programs and the amount of welfare it take to field a group of pampered special ed. steriod  addicts is outragous.
Best to just shut it down.

p.s. It's been done before. Hutchins at the U.of C, the original monsters of the Midway.

---

by: Rational @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 17:54:38 PM UTC

Hmmm... (0.00 / 0)

Rational, if you're going to make claims of 'cooking the books', then you should at least include the more obvious benefits of high profile sports programs in your fiscal stew.  Jay pointed some of those out.

Sports programs bring in money from donors and endowments.  The bulk of that at most Universities comes from football, like it or not.  Sports programs bring in students, both women and men.  Measure that in your metric o' fail. The U of M is expecting an enrollment of 14,000, an increase of slightly less than 2000 students.  MSU is also seeing an increase in enrollment (testimony to tough economic times) but nothing of that magnitude.  Care to venture a guess how much of that disparity is because the Grizzlies are always in your face?  Sports programs unify and maintain Alumni response.  That response has a significant dollar value to both the institution and the town in which it resides.

Jay's point was absolutely spot on.  Universities are not businesses, and it is as fallacious as hell to treat them as if they are. By attacking the profit status of football programs, you've bought into the very fallacy that Jay reviled.

the amount of welfare it take to field a group of pampered special ed. steriod (sic) addicts is outragous (sic).

That is offensive in the extreme. Some student athletes are exactly as you describe.  Most are not.  Your statement here is every bit as pig-headed as those who claim that all poor people are welfare cheats and criminals, or those who claim that all immigrants are dirty lazy wetbacks who spread crime and disease.  Grow up.  

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 22:05:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Football (0.00 / 0)

I am specifically speaking to the football expenses and players who soak up a huge proportion of the athletics budgets. you know football the sport where every year we hear of another school turning a blind eye to players taking "gifts" from alumni, rape and steriod abuse.
Those endowments are mostly tax deductable so in reality it is simply another form of welfare for jocks.

Universities are turning away students, Many schools are being forced to cut back on eductional programs, enrollment and  research but the welfare programs and eductional waivers for the muscle bound continue to soak up the resourcesof the schools.
Continue sports. Cut football. The budget deficits will drop dramactically and Title 9 will no longer be a problem.
Plus a little honesty about the value of atheletics to the bottom line of the universities would be nice. Before we add external value to sports lets at least have an honest accounting of how large a deficit football is creating. Then we can discuss the value of pumped up jocks hitting each other is to the educational mission that sshools are suppose to exist for.

---

by: Rational @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 22:53:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Methinks (0.00 / 1)

that rational is a little nerd who got beat up a lot by the jocks in highschool.  Hey, rat, did they ever wrap you up like a pretzel  in your own jockstrap?  Just wondering. Embarassing, isn't it? You see, rat, some of us actually LOVE college athletics.  Sorry that you don't.  But hey, maybe you could advocate for a university chess team!  No steriods needed!  Sheesh.  Talk about a non-issue.

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 14:31:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Amazing (0.00 / 0)

Failure to argue logically leads to personal smears of some one you do not know.
Your comment is unworthy of any serious discussion and consistent with over use of steroids coupled with the use of meth. I don't know if you abused steroids and are presently a meth head but that obviously must be the only reason you argue so incoherently.

Don't think that insinuation is fair? Especially since I do not know you?
If we are going to fabricated history's of each other out of thin air so be it.
If you, on the other hand wish to join the world of sane and reasonable debate you will cease and desist you pubescent snark.

Just because you love football doesn't lead to the fact that public dollars should be used as welfare for jocks simply for your amusement. I used to enjoy the America's Cup ( in the days of the 12 meter class ) but I never felt that that state schools should fund and field racing yachts.

Not when society has so many unmet needs.

Given your choice would you prefer funding for:

Health Care or College football

Preschool teachers or College football

Environmental Protection or College football

Clean Water or College football

Your choice.

---

by: Rational @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 16:11:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yup. (0.00 / 0)

You was pretzelled!  Gotta be.

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 16:53:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sad (0.00 / 0)

To much Steriods and meth
Gotta be.

---

by: Rational @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 19:32:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rat, (0.00 / 0)

sorry if I offend, but I've heard this same old tired argument for at least the last forty years or so.  And it always seems to come from young, inexperienced, sophomoric, pedantic little twits who don't know their asses for the proverbial hole in the ground.  OK, can we agree that your intellect is SO superior to everyone else's that you find football to be a supreme waste of time?  And that you'd MUCH rather be doing something remarkably intellectual rather than wasting an afternoon drinking copious amounts of beer and watching TV?  OK, you win.  But leave the entire REST of the population alone with your  stupid argument.  Hey, I have a great  idea.  Make up some flyers and hand them out at the next Cat/Griz football game.  I'm sure that those lower IQ folk will appreciate your critique of sports. Again, you win!

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 19:49:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Discuss Points (0.00 / 0)

Go ahead and enjoy for games.
Just don't reach into my pocket to subsidize it,
The schools andthe athletes would bemuch better served with the Football equililant of a Triple AAA league.

---

by: Rational @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 21:00:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sorry Hit Return (0.00 / 0)

a Football Triple AAA league.

1) It would not be welfare for jocks

2) It ould offer greater protection to the athletes in case of injury. If a "student (Right)" athlete gets injured all he can get is medical bills paid for by insurance and those terms are narrowly defined. Case in point was a U. Wash. player who got a broken neck and wasparalyzed in the Rose Bowl abouta decade back. Look it up it is not a pretty history. As Triple AAA players they could get lost wages etc.

3) It returns schools to the mission of education not as farm teams for the pros

4) It stops a single sport from bankruting an athletic budget and demonizing Title lX

ps before you keep erecting straw men to bolster your arguements I do enjoy a cold one and a game. Difference is I expect to pay for my amusements and don't demand that they be subsidized by the public dollars at the cost of other more important priorities being ignored.

pps at 6'2" and 180 lbs in High school I was never pretzeled so please next time you realize that your arguements are feeble try not top bolster them with delusions, fantasys and smears.

---

by: Rational @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 21:13:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

False Dilemmas, Rational. (0.00 / 0)

It's not 'either or'  It never has been.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 21:46:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That is part of the problem (1.00 / 1)

The fact that some how public monies are separate for different purposes even when they come from a common pot is a good way to protect bogus expenses.

But for the sake of discussion lets keep the alternatives within the educational system.
All the alternatives have been done through universities through the country.

Football or...

Community education

Funding Public Health programs with student interns

Advance environmental education and field training

Or even in sports.
The U. of Hawaii last year cut about 7 mens sports ( including swimming and golf) to keep the budget under control. They admitted it was 7sports or football. They tried to demonize title lX but sorry that won't fly.

So to preserve the priviledge of the brutes they sacrificed swimming ( in Hawaii), Wrestling, Golf and other sports.

Why is a losing proposition such as Football so sacrosanct to the neaderthals of our population?

.

---

by: Rational @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 23:02:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Community rating... (0.00 / 0)

Rational, LiTW can rate each others' comments. Enough "0s" and the comment goes away. Join me, and vote Larry's last comment appropriately.

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 22:18:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mark T, here I come! (0.00 / 0)

Oh good grief.  Let's vote everyone  off.  But, Jay, please  explain for me your experience that allows you to vote my comments off.  I have seen first hand for far too long this anti-athletic bullshit at the highschool level.  I have seen many young teachers come into teaching with the exact same attitude as Rat.  They feel  that athletics and academics are mutually exclusive, and therefore, athletics are a waste of time.  Well, they are not.  At any level.  Most of the athletes I coached were also the brightest, most accomplished students in the schools.  There is tremendous merit in athletics.  Jed thinks it prepares young people for war, and he may be partly right.  But  I think it prepares  kids for life!  

---

by: Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers! @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 22:52:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No Bias here? (0.00 / 0)

Lets see a coach who thinks his jocks abusing those smaller then them is funny (that rational is a little nerd who got beat up a lot by the jocks in highschool. Hey, rat, did they ever wrap you up like a pretzel  in your own jockstrap?  Just wondering. Embarassing, isn't it? )

Who believes insults make an arguement (from young, inexperienced, sophomoric, pedantic little twits who don't know their asses for the proverbial hole in the ground)

Who's paycheck depends upon continued welfare for jocks while insulting and scorning anything more intellectual then Sport's illustrated ( emphasis on Illustrated)

Citing his vested interest as the basis of why he should be considered as a fair judge of who the "the brightest, most accomplished students in the schools"  are?

Oh I worry for the youth exposed to such an open and reasonable person.

---

by: Rational @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 23:34:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

and another thing... (0.00 / 0)

Neither Rational or I are arguing that sports are bad...but the money and attention lavished on a few, select sports are. Like football, say.

That's the core of my argument, anyway. It's not Title IX that's screwing up men's sports, it's the big programs, like football. I want people to play sports at universities, if for no other reason than it keeps people healthy and happy. That's why I'm defending Title IX...

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 00:37:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

why? (0.00 / 0)

Because instead of explaining why his arguments aren't valid, or that sports -- esp. college football -- have the value we invest in them, you just said the dude was angry b/c he was a pencil-neck geek. That is, instead of challenging his ideas, you just insulted him.

That's like something from Troll 101.

By the way, you said more in your objection to me noting your comment could be banned than you did in your previous ten posts.

That's all I want. Discourse.

So next time your fingers start jogging towards the letters, J - E - R - K...just ask yourself...why? Why is what he's saying jerkish? What makes this a jerkish thing to say? What's my positive view of the world that contradicts this opinion? And explain.

People might actually like what you have to say.

Which reminds me: LiTW might be getting ready to have a comment policy and be more active in deleting comments and profiles because, frankly, the bullying and abuse from some quarters has made these comment forums almost toxic.

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 00:35:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

wulfgar... (0.00 / 0)

...I remember reading something about how less successful teams actually lose money, but I couldn't find the link and didn't include it in the post...

Rational, if you've got any links, share 'em!

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 11:18:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's not fair by any means, Jay (0.00 / 0)

But the real culprit here aren't women who want to play sports, it's the culture of sports that's ingrained at universities that essentially serves professional sports as a kind of development league.

The overwhelming majority of student athletes know full well that they have no role in professional sports after college.  That USC treats its football players as an NFL breeder farm is because it is.  That UNC treats its basketball players as potential NBA material is because they are.  That's what they recruit, and they don't disappoint.  But, do you honestly think that ISU recruited and offered scholarship to Jared Allen because they knew him to be an All Pro in the NFL six years later?  Not hardly.  They did it because they knew that sports nuts like me would pay to see Travis Lulay face off against the fearsome Mr. Allen when Lulay was a Freshman Phenom.  People really love sports.  It inspires them.  That's why there's a culture of sports.  Very few are being manipulated by the money leagues.  Those of us support this culture of sports do so because of emotion not finance.

Answer me this:  what's the third most popular sports team in Montana behind The Grizzly football squad and the Carroll College Saints (and they are possibly ahead of the Saints)?  Times up, so I'll answer:

The Lady Griz Basketball Team.  The reasons for that should be obvious, and they have nothing to do with developing players for professional sport.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 22:24:40 PM UTC

good points... (0.00 / 0)

...I had actually written this dang post a number of times, and in one draft, I talked about how states' taxpayers have no problem supporting these teams.

But wouldn't the love of sports support, say, local development leagues? I just question the assumption that universities have to be the place where this competition occurs.

Having worked as an instructor at a university (and about to teach here in Erie at a Penn St campus), it's appalling how the money is distributed, which program get the most funding and the new buildings. It's all about revenue. At the U of MT, the gym is a state-of-the-art, multi-million $$ facility, while the Fine Arts building was an asbestos-laden, leaky rat trap.

I assume you've seen similar things at st.

And now I'm ranting against ingrained cultural institutions, the way that greed and the "free market" has wormed its way into every aspect of our lives, and which has transformed colleges and universities from places where education is valued first into a kind of quasi-educational camp for 18 to 22 y.o.s...

/rant

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 11:30:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sports should be club teams (0.00 / 0)

When I was a student at UM, I didn't attend any sporting events (although that was partly due to having to work), but I still had to shell out ~$200 per semester in athletic fees which went to support the athletic department.  That was the only fee I had to pay which did not in some way advance my education. I didn't go to college to watch football or women's basketball, I went to learn.  

I don't have a problem with the sports teams being there.  I just don't like that they recieve a big chunk of their funding from student fees and out of the general fund.  The athletic associations solicit funds for student scholarships, so there's already a mechanism in place for acquiring the funding sports teams need.  

---

by: TimS @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 13:39:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]