Excellent letter. Thanks so much for leading me to Mr. Robinson's article
as well. Certainly we Americans seem to have a warped sense of priorities when
you look at the numbers cited in this letter.I also appreciate Mr.
Robinson's term "athletic arms race. It is a nice segue into another
troubling set of priorities. Last years national budget included $640B for
Defense and of that amount $220B was spent for military weapons and the research
and development for those weapons. In a study done in 1995, the GAO estimated
the average cost to bring schools into good repair was $1.7 million each—a
national total they pegged at $112 billion ($163 billion in today’s
dollars) So if we put a hold on buying new weapons for just one
year - let's say we just used the ones we already have - we could upgrade
every school in the country. Every one of them. Wouldn't that be a better
use of our tax dollars? Just something to think about.
When you can get a Math professor that brings profit to the table along with
good teaching then pay that man/woman what they are worth. Coaches have a role,
and in our society that role generates money, which is needed at any school.
Plus, it's great to stay in shape in state of the art facilities. Take
advantage of it.
Excellent point ECR.It's amazing that our universities have so
much money to waste on sports but they are always crying for money for
education. Then, they pass the price tag onto the backs of students.Just like our government has plenty to waste on wars, unsustainable defense
spending, foreign handouts, bank bailouts, oil subsidies, and ridiculous
congressional pay but don't have enough money for green energy, health
care, and education. Again, the price gouging is placed onto the backs of the
middle class while the rich get a free pass (just like the athletes).
Midvaliean,most school's sports programs lose money, they don't
bring it in.No, teachers are generally underpaid, especially K-12
teachers. Too much spent on administration, not enough on actual classroom
Teacher pay is a function of supply and demand. When the supply of teachers goes
up, it is easier to find new teachers willing to work for less. The same thing
is true for any profession. In recent years, there is an oversupply of law
students graduating, so law firms don't have to pay as much for new labor.
USU should be condemned for what is essentially just another form of left-wing
entitlement practice. It is nothing short of taking fromone group (sstudents)
and giving to another (athletes).The students at large neither want
nor need this expensive albatross. Yet, they are forced to pay for it: both
directly as taxpayers and fee payers, and indirectly by loss of expenditures
that should go their way.This is an example of what is wrong with
society as a whole: government taking from the many to give to a favored few.
@ JCSIf overpaying for football coaches is a "left wing
conspiracy" then why are the right wing SEC taker states the ones leading
the way in the football arms race? The mere fact that Nick Saban makes in 1
month more than the USU coach and Utah governor do in a year should speak
volumes.Of course, these lil details are ignored by low information
repub voters. They're too busy taking the money from producing states so
they can live off welfare and cheerlead their football games. Facts never get in
the way of the right wing's opinion.
Yes, John Charity Spring, we all know how much those evil liberals love to take
money from education and give it to athletics.Honestly, do you even
know who you're angry at at this point?
Our priorities are showing.
Lets put this in perspective. The highest paid surgeons at the U of U, including
those performing delicate heart surgeries on newborns who would die otherwise,
make less money than the Athletic coaches. So the U feels that the coach for a
mediocre team at best is worth more than some of the most highly trained
surgeons in the country. Is the guy who saves your newborn's life
really worth less than the football and basketball coaches? What is
really sad is that people will not complain about buying tickets to a football
game, but whine about paying a copay to a doctor that costs much less. The fact
is that many in society support the pay for the coaches and players, while
complaining about the much lower pay of people who actually provide demonstrable
benefit to society. And lets be honest, Obama does not decry coach salaries and
publicly funded stadiums, but he does think your doctor is overpaid, probably
because they are not Union members that pay dues to fund his campaign.The truth is this, the public should quit funding stadiums for rich sports
teams. If these facilities are money makers, they will pay for themselves.
@ Lost in DCIt seems like common knowledge that sports generate money.
Please share with us how you came by these facts that sports teams lose money
for the school. I'm sure there are exceptions but statistically, sports
are a net gain for most schools.
Most of these facilites, at least in Utah are built with private donations. I
agree that they are a little much, but athletics are a big business and those
that don't have the facilities don't succeed in the business. Just
think what the whining and crying would be if Brad Rock proposed the same
outcome for U of U sports that he said could possibly happen to BYU sports.
People would freak. I wasn't too happy when Ricks did away with their
athletic program when they went to 4 year status. But life does go on.
Midvaliean,from USA today (sorry, it is alittle dated) "the number of
schools able to cover their athletic expenditures fell to 14 in 2009, down from
25 the previous year" Only 7 met that benchmark in each of the prior 5
years.the chronicle of higher education reported in 2010 only 22
schools actually made a profit, 98 other BFS schools lost an average of $11.6
million.for all the money raked in by the football and men's
basketball, women's gymnastics (at the U) you have swimming, women's
basketball, track and field, soccer,field hockey, etc that lose a ton of money.
@lost in DC;When did you get so liberal?
When people start paying money to watch people take tests and televise them,
then things will change.
@Lost In DCThanks for providing that. I think what we can gleen from
that data is SOME schools can and do succeed at sports being profitable. Then
you have schools who wish they were the profitable schools. A school will
benefit most when they recognize their strengths (which may be sports) and put
their money where it will count the most. Trick is getting people to recognize
To "Bob Koenig" if you don't like it when a wealty person buys an
athletic building for a college, how about you go and donate a few million for
an educational facility for the same university?Who are you to
dictate how somebody else spends their money? Do you also think that wealthy
people shouldn't be allowed to own large homes, fancy cars, or go on
vacations that are better than yours?
RanchHand,I have ALWAYS supported education. It is a conservative thing
to do, give people the skills to be self-reliant and personally responsible.Midvaliean,sorry I could not get more current information, but
most websites just give revenues and did not include expenses. The numbers may
have changed with recent conference realignment and the mega-TV deals being
signed as a result, but those contracts only impact schools in the 5 power
conferences - all the little guys are left out.