Football entree with education fries (Houston, Austin: fit in, student loan, neighborhood)

[stan4]

Originally Posted by BigDGeek

I went to UT-Austin and while I'm sure some of that went on (there's at least a little of it in every football/basketball program), I sure didn't see any of it. Women's athletics got the same amount of attention and respect as they would at any other major flagship university, i.e. not much, but our female athletes weren't relegated to "shaking pom poms." Even our cheerleaders didn't do that; they had regional and national competitions of their own.

I was on a female team at UT and we didn't have our own dorm, our own chefs, our own tutors...and we had to pay for some of our travel/uniforms.

[kyam11]

Originally Posted by stan4

I was on a female team at UT and we didn't have our own dorm, our own chefs, our own tutors...and we had to pay for some of our travel/uniforms.

Difference is the football team can afford all of those things. Basketball too. Every other sport operates at a deficit

[Aceraceae]

I grew up playing several sports including football. Not at anything resembling these stadiums, but it was a lot of fun putting the uniform.

[BigDGeek]

Originally Posted by stan4

I was on a female team at UT and we didn't have our own dorm, our own chefs, our own tutors...and we had to pay for some of our travel/uniforms.

That's what I said...."not much."


I don't remember the football players having their own dorm per se. I heard rumors that they occupied a wing of Jester East, but I lived in Jester for two years and never actually saw it. I heard they also had their own cafeteria with good food while the rest of us were served slop. Rumor was that the cooks and servers were mental patients on day release from Breckenridge but again...you know how college rumors are. I have no idea if it was actually true.

[Beardown91737]

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

It may get few kids from every school to a college but many can't hold on their own to fairly pass their classes.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.nj.co...p_athletes.amp

What bothers me most is that football ruins moral fabric of schools and colleges, cheating/unfair grade bumping, hazing, drugs, rapes, concussions,partying, bullying etc. Its demeaning how smart and athletic girls are reduced to being cheerleaders for football players. These girls deserves to play sports or shine at gymnastics but they end up shaking pom poms for football heroes.

Football does not cause rapes.

Originally Posted by BLDSoon

To add another caveat to this discussion, is it Mora making the school money or the unpaid college athletes? Nobody's coming to watch Mora play. And lets be real, coaching is a minor( but important) part of it. I'd say the players and their skills carry more weight as far as whether the team is good or not, right? The coach is a guide he doesn't execute. Kind of like CEO's don't actually do the jobs they get credited with or Presidents dont make the laws they get associated with. Etc...

For UCLA it is Mora. Pac-12 opponents could pencil in a win before Mora showed up. Mora started winning his first year by instilling some discipline and removing his predecessor's son from the QB position.

[UnfairPark]

Originally Posted by Beardown91737

Football does not cause rapes.

No. It doesn't. Football is a toy. Football culture does. There is no other college sport connected to more rape scandals than football so there is a cause for concern and reform.

[numbersguy100]

Originally Posted by kyam11

Difference is the football team can afford all of those things. Basketball too. Every other sport operates at a deficit

You are cherry picking. Even most football and basketball programs operate at a deficit.

[kyam11]

Originally Posted by numbersguy100

You are cherry picking. Even most football and basketball programs operate at a deficit.

Yes but most of those teams that have the ridiculous spreads, chefs, tutors, etc. operate at the large profitable schools.

You also fail to understand that they are responsible for revenue not recognized in their bottom line which was the flaw in the first article

[numbersguy100]

Originally Posted by kyam11

Yes but most of those teams that have the ridiculous spreads operate at the large profitable schools.

You also fail to understand that they are responsible for revenue not recognized in their bottom line which was the flaw in the first article

At most, 25 FBS schools make money. And those programs that don't make money subsidize the football programs heavily - to the tune of almost $15mm (median figure, which means some subsidize it far more). And let's be honest, if every unprofitable program closed down tomorrow, those 25 profitable programs would no longer be profitable. They'd have no one to play games against which would decrease overall interest, limit TV time, ad spend, etc.
I am aware that there are some things not recognized in the bottom line, but not enough to change the conclusion that the college football industry in aggregate is wildly unprofitable and on net is a huge cost center in higher education spending.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by numbersguy100

You are cherry picking. Even most football and basketball programs operate at a deficit.

But many operate at a big time profit. A friend of mine is a prof. at OU he told me between OU's booster fundraising and direct sport revenue the school actually makes, not sure profit is the right word, several million dollars per year - IIRC the number was $8 million last year.