I am currently a high school senior. We all know that athletics come before academics, but we accept it because we don't get shafted too bad. However, what is happening at these universities is absolutely abominable. universities are institutions of higher learning, not corporations. Even if college sports paid for themselves (which they don't), that's not the point!!!!!!!!!! academics should ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS come first at that level. College should prepare students for the workforce, but by focusing on athletics you are only achieving that stated goal for less than 1% of the students since so few go pro.

Many of my friends at Arizona State University have seen 11% tax hikes, and I basically pulled out my applications for UCLA and Berkeley because of the gross tuition hikes. What colleges fail to understand is that 99% of student athletes do not go on to play professionally. Those athletes are depending on their education for their living, yet they are getting screwed over because colleges hold them to loose academic standards, let them get away with whatever they want, and continually reduce academic funding to finance sports upgrades from which almost all of the student athletes won't benefit in 5 years anyway!!!!

Finally, I am sick of hearing this bullshit argument that athletics can be used to fund academic advances. Forget the fact that colleges should not even be using this model as they are institutions of higher education, not higher athletics and then education. Forget the fact that many athletic programs are actually hemorraghing dollar bills and not fulfilling this promise. forget al lthat. The truth is that all the profits made from profit sports are pretty much used to simply fund more academic advances!!! Just look at texas (one of the schools turning a profit): mack brown won a bunch of games and presumably generated a bunch of money, but that money didn't go to fund more academic upgrades; it was used to expand his already bloated salary and put more resources into football!!!

if it sounds like i'm angry now then it is because I am. Fortunately most of the schools to which I have applied and would seriously consider attending were I to get acceptance (Stanford is the only exception) are small schools that are strictly academics-first and could care less how much money is made by the athletic departments. However, I am still bothered that so many others who see state universities as an effective, cost-efficient way for education get screwed over by greedy athletic departments. I always have loved and always will love sports, but many times I wish our society and culture as a whole put more emphasis on academics and less on athletics.

by the way, i forgot to mention it in my last comment, but when you are done reading Mr. Zirin's fabulous writing head over to my blog www.arjun-allthingssports.blogspot.com. thanks!

I wrote "The truth is that all the profits made from profit sports are pretty much used to simply fund more academic advances!!!"

i meant athletic, not academic advances.

One sad fact that I've learned from spending far too much time in academia in the states is that universities are corporations first and foremost and that education is largely seen as a necessary evil. This is coming from experience at both a DIII private university and a DI state university, and it's unrelated to athletics.

The cold fact of the matter is that educating students costs money, and revenues are fairly similar regardless of the quality of education provided. Most of a top university's income will come from: Alumni giving, financial investments, research grants.

If a professor has the choice between spending more time educating students and going after big grant money, guess which one the university wants. If a professor's grad student has a choice between spending more time helping the students he TAs and doing the research that is justifying that big grant money, guess which one his professor wants. The grad students who then go on to become professors themselves will have had little to no formal training in actually educating students-- they have been largely prepared to do research that will attract grants and get published. Good professors and TAs are much more of an accident than a product of the system, so when you find them, make sure you appreciate it.

Dave: about the study that you mentioned showing losses from the football programs-- did those losses factor in alumni donations? The theory I often heard bandied about was that alumni giving went way up for a winning football team or a new stadium, so even if there were losses on equipment compared with the ticket sales, it could still be a net win from the university's perspective.

I agree with DZ that tuition increases have far surpassed the inflation rate for eternity. Where I have issues is the false dichotomy between coaches' salaries and the funding of state universities. A better solution is to remove the university from the sporting business. Huge amounts of money are spent on Division I sports to train athletes(a lot of them are not students) for their professional careers. Let the professional leagues bankroll their own minor leagues and let the colleges educate.

Sports should be part of the student's curriculum. It should not be the sole reason why the student goes to college. Alas even if this occurs I don't think it will dramatically alter the education problem, but that's for a future DZ column.

EXCELLENT ARTICLE, THANK YOU, DAVE!! Reminds me of how we never see an Academics section of the newspaper but the Sports section is big as life. Only at graduation do we see any accolades given to the students who are diligent about their studies and whose main focus is on their education. Music and art departments as well as academic scholarships suffer severe cutbacks while the main focus seems to be on making sure the quarterbacks and centers don't flunk out of school. Save the athletic department at all cost - correction, save the money making sports teams. Have you ever seen the debate team traveling on a luxury bus??

Don't better performing football (and other) teams increase applications? Is that factored into the revenue?

I would also say that cheering on a high-power football team is one of the most fun things to do in college and it brings the school together in a unique and valuable way. Those are attributes that aren't necessarily measured economically.

Some of this stuff came up last year when Jim Calhoun was questioned about his salary. He responded with the argument that UConn basketball makes money and that he has donated money for academic buildings and programs. Where do you weigh in on that debate?

I agree with much of this article and I would add that another huge problem with college sports is how they manipulate the players and get slave-labor for the industry that is university athletics.

Yeah, it's time for the collegiate/Pro sector to either consider building official semi-pro leagues or require the current "unofficial" version to increase its share of funds that goes to the university. Nothing wrong with college sports, but when all that money goes to so few hands or doesn't exactly benefit the academic community, focus has been lost.

Arne Duncan is not all wrong. I am a teacher and a union member. I am pro-union. However, too often unions are rigid and do not consider the students. In the school districts in which I have worked there were individual class size limits rather than a limit on student contacts per day. That meant pre-algebra classes had the same number of students as advanced placement calculus. This was an absurd situation because the lower performing students needed much more individual attention than those in higher level classes.

Ask any high school math teacher if they would be willing to have 35-40 students in honors classes if that meant having 20 students in pre-algebra.

There is now a spate of evidence (summerized bt Atul Gawande in The New Yorker) pointing to serious brain damage to football players. If, after death, the brains sre sectioned an examined, they are frighteningly like those of Alzheimer's patients. How many colleges and universities have cut out football as a result of this persuasive evidense? None.

All "sports as spectacle" is ironically most effective in keeping the populace's eye off the ball. Panem et circences.

The story really did not hit on education persay but money spent on sports. I made the same argument last night when talking about the SWAC spending money to have there games elsewhere and not in the back yard of the school. Also mentioned was the fact that you make money on baskeball not football. THe only game in the SWAC that makes any type of money is the Bayou Classic at the Superdome. The only schools that make money off football is those top tier schools that have tv and shoe deals. Its a big myth that football brings money.

well said, Dave and its great to see that American youth are not the passive,apathetic 'lost generation' that they are always protrayed as in movies and that there things that young people are out there fighting for. 21st century youth have a purpose afterall!
Its a great inspiration to us everyone who ever thought that they were 'born too late to a world that doesnt care'. Viva la revolution!