Could They Survive Without University Support?
Several commentators have discussed whether or not university athletic teams could survive without subsidies from the administration. While not all athletic programs receive revenue from student fees (for instance, the large athletic program at my alma mater is entirely self-sufficient), there is evidence that suggests that many of these teams could financially survive in an independent semi-pro league.
Right now both the NFL and NBA financially benefit from the university-subsidized farm system. For instance, European football (soccer) franchises begin building and recruiting both teams and players at an early stage -- and are largely financed privately by the franchise sponsors.
Forbes recently compiled a list of the most valuable college basketball teams as well as the most valuable college football teams.
Not only are many of the highlighted teams fan favorites and successful (win/lose), but enormously profitable. For instance, in basketball the UNC Tar Heels reported a $16.9 million profit this past year. NC State, with the lowest operating expenses, earned $7.9 million in profits. These large margins are swollen largely through sponsorship contracts and merchandising agreements.
Similarly, there are 10 football teams that earned at least $45 million last year. And again, in addition to luxury boxes, the revenues typically come from sponsorship and merchandising deals.
One thing that is left unmentioned in either Forbes overview is that student-athletes at these large programs are typically allocated more financial resources, training equipment (e.g., personal assistants, exclusive gyms) and academic aid (e.g., personal tutors) than the rest of the student body. In addition, many student-athletes would not have been admitted based solely on their academic credentials (the NCAA has a sliding scale [pdf]) and some of their customized courses are at times, suspect.
If these sport teams are capable of raking in large quantities of cash, what are some reasons to justify this seemingly inequitable model -- especially when many are financed by student fees and/or taxpayers?
Also, while a low percentage of college athletes ever become professional athletes, why not just cut the "scholar" rhetoric and slice the umbilical cord? After all, a case could be made that the combination of lower academic standards and abundant resources arguably creates a two-tiered student caste system at the expense of those involuntarily financing it.
See also: The Knight Commission Report
The Union of Athletics With Educational Institutions
Comments (4)
Tyko
From snopes.com:
Published: January 31, 2008 11:48 AM
Tim Swanson
Next to a browser, photoshop is perhaps the most useful application for everyone to play with. It is heroic.
Published: January 31, 2008 9:59 PM
Chad
Personally, I would be thrilled to death if college sports teams were spun off from the universities and colleges with which they are current associated into "minor league" sports systems.
And, I say that as someone who has had more than one family member who went to college on a sports-related scholarship. I remember one of my mathematics professors remarking that a nearby bank had an entire interior wall dedicated to the local university, and not a single photo or item on display was related to academics.
The preferential treatment given to athletes (class scheduling, grade inflation, excused absenteeism, tutoring, etc.) even at a small, regional university like the one I attended was ridiculous to those of us who were actually trying to think, write, and study our way through school like one is supposed to do ... "halls of learning" and all that. However, I know that universities would never cut off the "cash cows" that are sports teams, not to mention that (successful) sports teams create "brand awareness" for their associated universities.
I just wish universities would decide what their core goal was -- Do they exist to mentally enrich the masses or just entertain them? -- because the two are completely at odds with each other.
Published: February 1, 2008 12:11 AM
Tom Hurst
Many university stadiums and such have been spun off and operate as pseudo-private corporations, albeit corporations with hundreds of millions of tax dollars paying their capital expenses. What a racket. As an aside, many university "research institutes" also act as pseudo-private entities that use substantial government subsidies to (unfairly) compete with private technical consulting companies. I can think of nothing less efficient than government "businesses", and I say totally sell off all of these parasitic government enterprises and let them fail or succeed as they compete with proper private enterprises.
Further, athletics really has nothing to do with academics, despite the existence of bogus "sports leadership" and other such crap degree programs. In my travels abroad, scholars at good universities find our system of university athletics quite laughable and disingenuous. It is far beyond obvious that they are just tax-subsidized farm teams for the professional leagues.
Finally, I would suggest to Chad that universities do not exist either to educate the masses or to entertain them per se. These mini-empires exist only to extract the wealth of citizens and put it in the hands of government (and to spread a little socialist propaganda while they're at it). Whatever works to do that, that will become their "mission". And that's one big reason why it matters not to them that they graduate mostly idiots with bullshit degrees these days. It's the money and power that is the point...
Published: February 1, 2008 5:50 AM