Sign in to follow this  
detlef

Does the Athletic Dept pay the school for scholarships?

Recommended Posts

When a guy like Mack Brown gets a massive raise (and that was one freaking massive raise I think 60% or so off a huge base), it is always pointed out that he's not paid by the school but by the Athletic Dept which generates a ton of money for the school, etc.

 

Now, in general, I don't have much problem with this and realize that it's a strawman argument to point out that these guys are the highest paid state employees, and the state is running a deficit, etc. Again, they are the main cog in a money making machine and apparently UT's machine makes way more than anyone else's.

 

All that said, I am curious to know how much of a burden the football team is on the school. I understand that net, the school is better off with the team but when they mention how much the program brings to the school, do they take into account the cost the school bears in housing, feeding, and teaching these players or is the amount they claim the program brings above and beyond that cost? It would seem rather disingenuous to not show the net gain on the part of the school.

 

And, lastly, I'm not sure I'm on board with just giving the programs carte blanche when it comes to paying these guys, at least if they insist upon spending the money somewhat foolishly. There's certainly an argument to be made for keeping key employees by staying ahead of the competition in terms of compensation. But that logic sort of fails if you pay drastically over the going rate. At least I think that a program affiliated with a school should have to explain why they're going to pay their coach so much more than any of the other top guys in the country. Was there any risk at all of losing Brown if they simply bumped him up to $4 mil? Wouldn't that make him the highest paid coach in the country? Sure there are a few pro coaches making more than that but is Brown the kind of guy who'd get that kind of offer from the big boys? Is he really at all interested in making the jump anyway? Regardless of whether or not the football team is making money, if UT is like any other school, as a whole, they're likely struggling and the timing seems a bit odd.

 

I was almost going to say that Mack could do his legacy a favor and decline some of the raise, say that last $1 mil and tell them to put it towards the school. Then it dawned on me how little such a hugely generous gesture would actually buy him because those bitter over how much these guys make wouldn't be able to get past the fact that at $4 mil, he still makes whatever times more than a professor, blah, blah. So scratch that. Get paid.

 

None the less, I still question the wisdom of the AD. I'm sure Brown's agent is quick to point to how much more money UT makes than anyone else and certainly Mack is running a great program. However, you have to also realize that he's selling College Football to Texans, which is probably not all that hard to do, and to say he's worth so much more than the other elite coaches implies that Carroll, Meyer, Stoops, etc would not also be able make them cash in. That seems like a major stretch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand the money produced by the sports teams goes into somewhat of a general fund at the school. THe school controls these monies and uses them for what ever purpose they deem necessary. I'm certain this is an over simplification as to how monies are alotted to certain things... but, since these monies become the property of the school, yes the money generated by the football team goes toward scholarships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I understand the money produced by the sports teams goes into somewhat of a general fund at the school. THe school controls these monies and uses them for what ever purpose they deem necessary. I'm certain this is an over simplification as to how monies are alotted to certain things... but, since these monies become the property of the school, yes the money generated by the football team goes toward scholarships.

Right, but on Mike and Mike, while they were going above and beyond saying nobody should say "boo" about what Mack was getting paid, they were throwing numbers around about how much the program gives the school. Is that number net? As in, the team covers it's ass in terms of what it costs to bring these kids to the school and then gives that money above and beyond or does that money include what the team also costs the school to be there?

 

My point is, I don't want to hear how much you "give" to the general coffers of the school if they have to turn around and spend a half mil of it to teach and house your team. Tell me how much the school is actually making off having your team there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The University of Texas athletic department funds itself, primarily through it's football program and to a lesser degree through it's basketball program. Here is a pretty intersting article from a year ago aboutt he UT athletics program, the money it pays the coaches, and how much money they bring in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The University of Texas athletic department funds itself, primarily through it's football program and to a lesser degree through it's basketball program. Here is a pretty intersting article from a year ago aboutt he UT athletics program, the money it pays the coaches, and how much money they bring in.

Gotta be a member to read it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The University of Texas athletic department funds itself, primarily through it's football program and to a lesser degree through it's basketball program. Here is a pretty intersting article from a year ago aboutt he UT athletics program, the money it pays the coaches, and how much money they bring in.

Like Cid, I couldn't read the whole story. Does it actually answer the question, though? I would expect the AD to pay for itself in terms of what it costs to field a football team. Does it pay it's own way otherwise? The education, whether used or not, does have a cost. When a player is given a scholarship, does the AD pay for that? When they're given housing, does the AD pay for that? That's really what I was trying to find out.

 

Again, I don't question that the U sees a net positive cash flow through it's relationship with the AD but just want to know that I'm getting the straight dope when programs, answering to scrutiny over what they pay their coaches say how much the give to the U. I also am not personally offended or concerned that those coaches that have proven they can deliver a winning product get paid handsomely. I can, however, question the judgment of a department that voluntarily gives a guy the kind of raise UT gave Brown in light of the fact that they likely didn't need to and the fact that it is certainly a slap in the face of the U as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like Cid, I couldn't read the whole story. Does it actually answer the question, though? I would expect the AD to pay for itself in terms of what it costs to field a football team. Does it pay it's own way otherwise? The education, whether used or not, does have a cost. When a player is given a scholarship, does the AD pay for that? When they're given housing, does the AD pay for that? That's really what I was trying to find out.

 

Again, I don't question that the U sees a net positive cash flow through it's relationship with the AD but just want to know that I'm getting the straight dope when programs, answering to scrutiny over what they pay their coaches say how much the give to the U. I also am not personally offended or concerned that those coaches that have proven they can deliver a winning product get paid handsomely. I can, however, question the judgment of a department that voluntarily gives a guy the kind of raise UT gave Brown in light of the fact that they likely didn't need to and the fact that it is certainly a slap in the face of the U as a whole.

 

That is a good question. When they get free education, even though there is a cost associated with it if you pay tuition, the teachers and classes are still "there". It isnt like when you or I sell a meal and there is a set cost to buying the raw materials. My point isnt some of this theoretical in terms of how much a tuition is "worth"? Does the athletic department "pay" the registrar, or is it just a forgiven debt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the University of Texas the athletic department is completely self sufficient. The AD pays for the scholarships. Basically the article praises DeLoss Dodds limiting the total number of athletic programs to 20, but fully funding all 20 with top paid coaches and top notch facilities. It also praises him and the AD at OU for being instrumental in forming the BIG 12 and getting a hugh TV contract form ABC. Additionally UT was one of the first universities to have corporate sponsors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is a good question. When they get free education, even though there is a cost associated with it if you pay tuition, the teachers and classes are still "there". It isnt like when you or I sell a meal and there is a set cost to buying the raw materials. My point isnt some of this theoretical in terms of how much a tuition is "worth"? Does the athletic department "pay" the registrar, or is it just a forgiven debt?

Opportunity costs still exist. Most of these schools are turning away applicants so those seats could be filled with paying customers. Sounds like a moot point though if what pearch says is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Opportunity costs still exist. Most of these schools are turning away applicants so those seats could be filled with paying customers. Sounds like a moot point though if what pearch says is true.

 

I don't know if it is true of all universities, but according to November 2008 issue of Texas Monthly Magazine it is true for the University of Texas. The link I provided above is to that issue. Yes, you have to register, but it is free. The article was very interesting to me as a Texas fan but I think it would be interesting to all college football fans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the University of Texas the athletic department is completely self sufficient. The AD pays for the scholarships. Basically the article praises DeLoss Dodds limiting the total number of athletic programs to 20, but fully funding all 20 with top paid coaches and top notch facilities. It also praises him and the AD at OU for being instrumental in forming the BIG 12 and getting a hugh TV contract form ABC. Additionally UT was one of the first universities to have corporate sponsors.

 

Their contract is a pittance compared to what the SEC and the Big Ten have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.