Too insane.

[Gopherhurrin]

I general I do agree with your post. I would interject that when I buy my football season tickets it annoys the hell out of me that such a large percent of that price goes to totally silly things that have zero point zero, zero interest to me. The arms race is costing me money and I am losing heart and faith in the system.

 

[grunkiejr]

I agree with Gopherhurrin, partially.

The "arms race" in college athletics has gotten absurd. If someone can explain the economics behind the decision to pay coaches more than any other state employees (especially those who's work affects vastly more people day-to-day), I would like to hear it.

All you have to do is look at the Gophers basketball program with Tubby compared to before Tubby. The basketball revenues have increased dramatically and the increase is much greater than the incremental salary that we are paying Tubby vs. what Monson was getting.

 

[EG#9]

The "arms race" has been around for a long, long time and Minnesota has been unwilling to play. Instead of having a fundraiser to save golf and gymnastics, there should have been a fundraiser to make Gopher football relevant again. The interview with Dave Revsine in the Star Tribune started out by asking Revisine how do you turn around a program that has been down for so long? Really? This needs to be asked? There are two programs that historically have not held a candle to Minnesota who are currently kicking its ass, and we have to ask how to turn the program around? The answer is in front of our collective faces, but nobody either wants to play the game, or worse, admit that it is an ugly game that requires unpopular decisions.

It's absolutely ridiculous that the basketball program does not have a practice facility today, while lesser schools already have them or are in the process of building them.

I don't like the "arms race", but I want the Gophers to compete in it. If the University wants to take a stand against this "arms race", that's fine, but make it clear that is what you are doing. Challenge other schools to not build new facilities, to maintain a budget for the two major sports of X dollars and meet you on equal footing. Don't drag your feet forever and then spend similar amounts of money on items that 70% of the Big Ten had 5 years before us. Play the game, or take a stand, just quit falling somewhere in the middle.

 

[Schlic Daddy]

My problem with these exorbitant facilities is that while people are throwing millions of dollars into these facilities that are not necessary, there are schools like St. Cloud State dropping their football programs. I realize many of these practice facilities are being paid for privately, but it is still tough to watch.

 

[GopherJake]

Don't drag your feet forever and then spend similar amounts of money on items that 70% of the Big Ten had 5 years before us. Play the game, or take a stand, just quit falling somewhere in the middle.

Excellent philosophical point.

We do have a very highly paid b-ball coach and a beautiful brand new football stadium......

 

[OSUfan]

gopherhurrin, you really are foolish to include OSU in your brief list of "offenders" since they are one of the select few FBS schools that actually made money last year. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5490686

Perhaps you should be citing Minnesota instead, since the odds are the Gopher athletic department lost money last year.

I don't think there's a principled reason for you to dig OSU for their athletic department expenditures. Are some of the things they do extravagant? Maybe, but if they can pay for it on their own and still make money for the university, how is it your place to judge them and say they shouldn't be spending as much money or should be doing other things with their money? They are like a self-sustaining business, and should be allowed to make business decisions that help them grow. They're not relying on state subsidies and all the facilities they build are thanks to private donations, so you can't claim you have a stake in it by virtue of being a taxpayer. Just because other schools do things they can't afford, doesn't mean what OSU is doing is wrong. There are haves and have nots in every aspect of life, and to expect everyone to be equally popular and therefore equally wealthy is hopelessly naive. Your vision of "equality" would require private individuals and businesses to not be allowed to support the university athletic program of their choosing because too many other people are doing it. Popularity is not by itself an evil, but you seem to think it is for some reason.

It's ludicrous of you to expect/hope for some omnipotent "authority" to step in and tell a school like OSU that makes money "you can't build that facility" or "you can't pay a coach that much money" to try to "level" the collegiate playing field. Universities need to be allowed to distinguish themselves from each other because they compete for students - your opinion can be extended to an argument that every school has to pay every professor the same amount of money, give the same quality of teaching, and have the same classrooms, because it makes things more even, ergo more collegial. I don't think you appreciate the fact that great competition spurs greater effort and innovation. You should want the competition to be as strong as possible, because that would make anything that your school does win even better.

 

[NateDawgUM]

It's ludicrous of you to expect/hope for some omnipotent "authority" to step in and tell a school like OSU that makes money "you can't build that facility" or "you can't pay a coach that much money" to try to "level" the collegiate playing field.

Honestly how is it ludicrous? All of the professional sports leagues do it in some way or another to help ensure parity and financial health.

 

[OSUfan]

Universities aren't pro sports franchises - duh! Quit comparing the two. An athletic department is a business of sorts but it's only part of the much larger business of a university which is essentially education & relationship-building, and that can be accomplished with or without sports. A pro sports franchise is a business that has no objective other than winning, and that can't be accomplished without sports. As I explained in the part that was cut off, it's ludicrous because universities need to be able to distinguish themselves from each other because they compete with each other, and competition brings out the best. Having better sports programs is simply one thing a university does to make it more appealing to students. To be opposed to a university athletic department that makes money and doesn't rely on taxpayer dollars is unprincipled no matter what the scale of the budget is because universities compete with each other and naturally some are going to be bigger than others. To want to limit a university like Florida to the same amount of money to spend on their sports as Harvard or NC A&T is ludicrous. As I said, gopherhurrin's argument is a bad one because logically it is no different (actually, even worse) than saying there should be equal limits on how much universities can pay their professors and how much money they can invest in educational buildings/facilities. Competitive equity in collegiate sports doesn't really matter because education is the primary mission, and I don't see gopherhurrin opining for equity in education spending across all universities, so his argument rings pretty hollow to me and reeks of jealousy. gopherhurrin's argument in favor of "modest," equal expenditures on coaches and facilities is an anti-competitive argument because it would have the effect of limiting the ability of a university to distinguish itself and compete with other universities - even though he purports to be arguing for a more "even" playing field, his argument has anti-competitive overtones.

 

[Saber]

While few athletic departments made money, most football and basketball programs do make money (Hockey too here in Minnesota - most schools just have the 2 sports), the problem is that so much money is drained off by the other sports.

The U of M athletic department probably did lose money last year, but that's primarily because our football program sucks despite the shiny new stadium, and we put such a heavy emphasis on non-revenue-generating sports.

I know I saw an article about the most profitable basketball programs in the country, and I want to say MN was #17, or at least somewhere in that range.

And Tubby has everything to do with the program being that profitable, so I'm not really that concerned about the amount of compensation that we give him. I just wish we could get a practice facility built, and soon. For the sport that benefits your school's athletic department the most to be neglected like this is frustrating.