Why would the Dean of a school not want a Football team or a Winning Football team? Winning teams mean big money for the school in Ticket sales, and T-shirts sales etc.
shareThat's just a comment on the real-life resentment that many academics in colleges have against the sports programs at their schools, since many colleges' sports teams get far more attention than the academic programs do.
shareThe dean just wanted to be a jerk and that is why he wanted the football team to fail.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! www.deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
Because it is a movie.
share[deleted]
actually that is far from true in Div IA.
any major conference in Football and basketball has revenue sharing and also bring in tons of money.
for example, the University of Texas Football revenue from a 6 home game schedule basically funds the entire atheletic program by itself. technically as of 2008 football accounted for 69% of the 105 million. then when you add in the schools merchandising of the athletic teams that raises the revenue that it brings in.
not to mention revenue sharing that allows for the smaller schools to survive and the pay-for-play scheduling. ie Texas pays North Texas to come down to Austin twice without Texas having to go up to Denton. this allows Texas to play both games in austin where more money can be made for both schools.
then you put in local, state, national coverage of the games which again brings in more money to the Conferences and Schools.
Programs that can field mens and womens teams in a competitive conference stand quite a good chance of bringing in substantial revenue for the school and athletic program.
I heard on the radio a few months back a representative from the NCAA say that about 1/3 of the schools actually make money off their athletic programs. He also said that a large number are actually making money but paying down debt so that in a couple years about 2/3 of the schools will actually be making money off their athletic programs.
shareI heard on the radio a few months back a representative from the NCAA say that about 1/3 of the schools actually make money off their athletic programs.
look at my school, the []__[], in the 80's we dominated & brought in $$. & our dean wormer type president began to bite the hand that fed him, which was the football team that was virtually made up of talented black inner city kids. the football overshadowed the academics & he hated that. but if the team wasn't so great & didn't bring in all that money, the new academic buildings on campus wouldn't be built.
share[deleted]
"Womens sports bring little or no money to a university."
Absolutely true. A recent report on women's collegiate basketball revealed that there isn't a single school in the NCAA playing women's basketball that doesn't spend more money than it brings in. Women's basketball is also the sport that generates the most revenues among any women's sports program in the NCAA.
That doesn't mean that Title IX is wrong or that money is wasted on women's sports. Or for that matter on the men's sports that also lose money. The purpose of sports programs in college (or high school either for that matter) is not making money for the school. For sports that generate funds from programs like men's basketball and football, those funds are a bonus.
Sports weren't started in colleges to make money. They were started to promote and encourage competition, physical fitness and offer opportunity to those who compete in the sports to continue on as they move through the college system. The NCAA's core values include:
• The collegiate model of athletics in which students participate as an avocation, balancing their academic, social and athletics experiences.
• The highest levels of integrity and sportsmanship.
• The pursuit of excellence in both academics and athletics.
• The supporting role that intercollegiate athletics plays in the higher education mission and in enhancing the sense of community and strengthening the identity of member institutions.
Sure, having programs that make money isn't a bad thing. But that's not why the programs were started or why they continue to operate. If that were true, the only sports that would be offered were those which make money. The rest would have been dropped long before Title IX passed.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
In a comedy like this, it tends to be the Dean who is the bad guy!
Its that man again!!
In 2009 Hofstra University dropped their football program. "The cost of the football program, now and in the future, far exceeds the return possible," Hofstra president Stuart Rabinowitz said. He added that despite Hofstra having sent several players to the NFL, the program does not attract enough national attention. "Given that, along with the low level of interest, financial support and attendance among our students, our alumni and the community, the choice was painful, but clear."
It came as a big surprise to New York area sports fans. Hofstra won a lot of games and sent players to the NFL like Marques Colston and Wayne Chrebet. I heard one alumni football player accuse the dean and board of trustees of being jealous of the recognition the team had received.
It came as a big surprise to New York area sports fans.
actually not as uncommon as you might think
share