mjk, I'm not doubting you at all that they can get butts in all the seats; I'm sure you've been to the games and your eyeballs have given you all the evidence that's necessary. I'm just wary to accept that a full stadium automatically equals profit, unless you're going to ignore the capital cost of building the thing in the first place, operational costs. etc. Big programs have big incomes and big expenses, and some of the expenses are not so obvious. This last spring, the CU football team and its runaway expenses (much of which was caused by stupid personnel moves and moves by stupid personnel) were the death of the men's tennis program, which had been around since 1915. They shot a great program in the head because of the fiscal irresponsibility of others; when you have to pay off two head coaches' contracts, it don't come cheap. At CU and at too many other schools, football is only "profitable" if other programs pay the cost.
Yes, I agree, lbb. What happened in Boulder the last couple of years is very ugly stuff, but I don't think for one second that it only happened/happens there. And CU is a BIG time school, with a BIG time athletic budget, and yet, they are the only Big 12 school that does not field a baseball team. And, how successful was their tennis team? Was it mens tennis, or both the womens and mens teams that were dissolved? I know that they are always a factor in deciding the NCAA Skiing championships, and that program is bound to cost much more than the tennis program. I doubt that it was an easy decision for those that made it. I have read that some inner city high schools may have to quit offering athletic and/or music programs entirely, due to budget problems/lack of support/legalities, etc etc. In my mind, that would be one of the worst things that could happen to kids attending those schools. It is a broad generalization, but I have always believed in the idea that kids are less likely to get in trouble if they are somehow occupied with athletics or other extra-curricular activities that involve adult guidance, and I am thankful that we do not have those difficulties that other school districts across the country face. But, I also think, that if those things are important to a school district/community, they will not let those programs cease to exist, that they will find a way to keep them going, regardless of cost. Of course, this is an outsiders perspective, and I truly have no idea what it would take for some schools to adhere to my uppity beliefs. Sometimes, all one can do is shake their head and ask why.
And, how successful was their tennis team? Was it mens tennis, or both the womens and mens teams that were dissolved? It was the men's team. The women's program is still there. The program was doing well and improving -- they were ranked 25th in April, their highest ranking. They ended the season at 23rd and went to the NCAA tournament for the first time since 1988, and finished third in the Big 12. I know that they are always a factor in deciding the NCAA Skiing championships, and that program is bound to cost much more than the tennis program. I doubt that it was an easy decision for those that made it. I'm not sure, but I believe that the ski teams come up with a lot of their own funding and work their own deals for a lot of expenses. It's defintely not the case that the school is buying race skis for the teams -- they'll get pro deals for the kids, but ski team members almost always buy their own gear. As for the tennis team, axing it was a pretty stupid decision. Bohn (the current AD) wasn't responsible for the screwups that led to the fiscal problems, but this decision and his handling of it was stupid. He clearly thought that nobody would care except the team and the coaches. Instead, there was a lot of reaction from the community. There was a grassroots effort to raise a million dollars to endow the program for three years; $660,000 got raised in eight weeks, and Bohn decided to shut it down anyway, not even give an extension to raise the rest of the money. I'll admit to a personal connection: I've hit at the CU tennis complex, I've watched the team play, and I know the head coach, who's a gentleman and a scholar. I was one of the people who kicked in, in vain, to try and save the team. It's hard not to want to spit all over college football when this kind of thing happens over and over again. I have read that some inner city high schools may have to quit offering athletic and/or music programs entirely, due to budget problems/lack of support/legalities, etc etc. In my mind, that would be one of the worst things that could happen to kids attending those schools. It is a broad generalization, but I have always believed in the idea that kids are less likely to get in trouble if they are somehow occupied with athletics or other extra-curricular activities that involve adult guidance, and I am thankful that we do not have those difficulties that other school districts across the country face. Agreed except for the "inner city" generalization. I live in a rural area, and it's the same set of issues without exception. But, I also think, that if those things are important to a school district/community, they will not let those programs cease to exist, that they will find a way to keep them going, regardless of cost. Of course, this is an outsiders perspective, and I truly have no idea what it would take for some schools to adhere to my uppity beliefs. Sometimes, all one can do is shake their head and ask why. But they've got mandates that require them to offer certain programs; they've got heat on them to meet certain minimums on standardized tests. They have to do those things -- that's where the money goes to first. You can be as determined as you want and raise taxes all you want and have all the bake sales you want, but if nimrods somewhere else vote in an educational mandate that says that you have to jump through all these hoops because of some No Chld's Behind Left law, there goes the money you raised. And you have to heat the building too, which doesn't mean a thing in much of the country, but up here in the north it costs a damn fortune. Costs go up, mandates increase...anything even vaguely optional gets axed. It's not so much a matter of local choices.