MO's coaches salary is nothing compared to the NIL money they have to spend to get the players in order to compete.

UM's gross football revenue is $58 million per year, that money funds everything, but the big expense is $31 million in NIL money.

NIL is the Bain of NCAA existence, but it's not his $10.75 salary and that is not paid from any state funds or taxpayer money, it's all funded by media rights, ticket sales, concessions, but not out of UM's general fund.

Most coaches at high paying universities are not paid from the schools general fund, most all are paid through the athletics association and funded by big donors and tv media money. None of that money would have ever been available to pay teachers, professors, books etc since it's earned on the basis of the football/basketball programs success.

NIL, now that's paid the same way, in essence with NIL college sports is now clearly a pre-pro paid league.

We could argue if sports should exist in college, but it's a losing argument, take it away, all the money surrounding it leaves, it doesn't convert into the general fund. No sports, no TV money to share.

Sports have been around since the Romans had games, football started the late 1800's in organized sports Rutgers vs Princeton played the first game in 1869. People are not going to give up their love for their alma mater and athletics does represent pride for many states.

quote:

Most coaches at high paying universities are not paid from the schools general fund, most all are paid through the athletics association and funded by big donors and tv media money. None of that money would have ever been available to pay teachers, professors, books etc since it's earned on the basis of the football/basketball programs success.

I understand that argument... that football pays for itself, and even subsidizes other sports.

Still, I think it's wrong. I'm of the belief that the focus of a school should be education. Sports were once 'extra-curricular activities', which were for fun and exercise.

From the last page:

quote:

I agree with you that capitalism needs to sort this out. Why not remove the government from the equation entirely?

quote:

Sports have been around since the Romans had games, football started the late 1800's in organized sports Rutgers vs Princeton played the first game in 1869. People are not going to give up their love for their alma mater and athletics does represent pride for many states.

I'm a football fan. I love the competition.
I'm not a fan of what big money has done to the game, or the university.

I'm not sure how you put the genie back in the bottle, but: The US University system is broken.

We've been talking about closing the Department of Education since Ronald Reagan pledged to do so. That still has not been done. I think getting all federal money out of education and letting the States do what they want is the first step in the right direction.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Sports have been around since the Romans had games, football started the late 1800's in organized sports Rutgers vs Princeton played the first game in 1869. People are not going to give up their love for their alma mater and athletics does represent pride for many states.

I'm a football fan. I love the competition.
I'm not a fan of what big money has done to the game, or the university.

I'm not sure how you put the genie back in the bottle, but: The US University system is broken.

We've been talking about closing the Department of Education since Ronald Reagan pledged to do so. That still has not been done. I think getting all federal money out of education and letting the States do what they want is the first step in the right direction.

Don't disagree with you at all, there is mega money in big sports, same here on Football, and preferably college basketball, until the new coach at my Alma Mater proves he can get them to play competitive in the SEC!

What big sports money has changed the game, NIL has made it worse.

The academic problem at universities is a different kind of problem and not related to how much the Coaches are paid, the federal funding and constant implanting of far left indoctrination professors is IMO a bigger problem than any $ paid a football coach.....

Sports, tuition, asmin salaries, room and board, student loans. If we can’t define the problem, we have no hope of fixing it.

quote:

The academic problem at universities is a different kind of problem and not related to how much the Coaches are paid, the federal funding and constant implanting of far left indoctrination professors is IMO a bigger problem than any $ paid a football coach.....

Yes, I agree.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Sports, tuition, admin salaries, room and board, student loans. If we can’t define the problem, we have no hope of fixing it.

The problem is government.
Once you take government out of the equation, the experimentation will begin.
Some schools will succeed, some will fail.
Dollars and students will flow to the successful. The unsuccessful will change or close.

There are thousands of universities and colleges in the USA. Nobody is forcing anyone to pick one school over another. That seems fairly free market to me.

The school I went to from 1995-1997; The Culinary Institute Of America was very nice and a beautiful campus but was NOTHING like the amenities they have today.

We had crappy dorm workout rooms or had to drive down the road to Marist College to use their gym and pool etc. Just as I was graduating in summer of 1997 they were blasting the area to build a student recreation center which over the years turned into this HUGE elaborate student commons and gym and pool and event center and dining center.

I looked up the tuition and it's literally 4 TIMES now what I paid, I used GI Bill, grants and took one loan out for $15,000 that I paid off early. Now these kids are walking away with 6 figure loan debt. To go work in a hotel or restaurant making shit money. It's INSANE.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
There are thousands of universities and colleges in the USA. Nobody is forcing anyone to pick one school over another. That seems fairly free market to me.

The two areas of our economy with the highest levels of funding participation by government are education and health care.
They are also the two areas where inflation greatly exceeds the rest of the economy.

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
The school I went to from 1995-1997; The Culinary Institute Of America was very nice and a beautiful campus but was NOTHING like the amenities they have today.

We had crappy dorm workout rooms or had to drive down the road to Marist College to use their gym and pool etc. Just as I was graduating in summer of 1997 they were blasting the area to build a student recreation center which over the years turned into this HUGE elaborate student commons and gym and pool and event center and dining center.

I looked up the tuition and it's literally 4 TIMES now what I paid, I used GI Bill, grants and took one loan out for $15,000 that I paid off early. Now these kids are walking away with 6 figure loan debt. To go work in a hotel or restaurant making shit money. It's INSANE.

Yes that is a major problem and as chellim1 pointed out, massive funding to students from government.

Mike Rowe has been championing blue collar jobs and trade schools for quite a while, we need people that turn wrenches as much as type in code.

It's a big ship, with lots of money, takes a while to turn those things around.

quote:

Originally posted by ibanda:
I may not remember this story exactly but, one of our former members JALLEN told a story from I think 1950s. He played trumpet in a band at a New Year's Eve party, made about $300 and that paid tuition for a semester at University of Texas.

It was that way into the early 80s up here. My first quarter at Montana State was $275 for tuition/fees, and I would argue that the education was far better than what they get nowadays.

If you ever want to go down a dark dark hole, look into the history of two things a) state/federal accountability and b) standardized achievement test.

On accountability it has its roots in the 1983 "A Nation at Risk" which essentially concluded that the average High Schooler could not read and comprehend literature and could not due math that involved multiple steps.

The first real attempt to organize it all was Clintons Goals 2000. but really what was happening was states would just 'lower' their norms so they could meet them. i.e. look at Mississippi during the time (iirc 90% percentile in state expectations, bottom 10% on the SAT). I used to have a video of Senator Obama discussing this and the need for reform. AND that brings us to "no child left behind" which really means, we stopped caring about any student above the norm and focus entirely on those below the norm. (but I digress).

Anyway, here we are.

Yes, there is entirely too much administrative overhead at most universities. Some easy targets are DEI etc. but really, there is a gross amount of waste. but this is nearly at all levels, just do an examination of how much it costs to educate a child then find out how much of that actually goes to the classroom and teacher. It is pennies on the dollar. This is similar to the bloat at the Red Cross. The vast majority of each dollar does not go where people think it does.

I would not have a degree, nor be a professor if not for the student loan situation. My dad would never have been able for me to afford it and I worked 30 hours a week on top of the grants and loans. (this was in the early 90's) So I will not speak of removing that system.

I believe it is the "everybody has to go to college" that is at the root of it. And admission standards.

One last thing. In the 90's there were just a few online accredited universities. Now there are over 400. Most medium sized colleges are staying solvent ONLY through the growth of their online program. The vast majority of the students get and receive student loans as well. Just something to think about.

There were very few amenities when I attended college. No air conditioning in the dorm with steam heat from a radiator. The room was tiny. Bunk beds pushed into a dormer window,two large wooden desks with chairs and two large metal footlockers from the 1930s. Oh a tiny sink. Bathrooms down the hall. You had to bring your own curtains for the tiny window. The university provided laundry service with everything heavily starched. Had to have sewn tags on your belongs so you got them back. You always got socks from some other guy. One rotary phone shared with twenty other guys.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
There are thousands of universities and colleges in the USA. Nobody is forcing anyone to pick one school over another. That seems fairly free market to me.

The two areas of our economy with the highest levels of funding participation by government are education and health care.
They are also the two areas where inflation greatly exceeds the rest of the economy.

Focusing on just colleges and universities, the students are being given the money through Pell Grants and loans. The students get the money regardless of the school they choose. My point is this:

“The problem is government.
Once you take government out of the equation, the experimentation will begin.
Some schools will succeed, some will fail.
Dollars and students will flow to the successful. The unsuccessful will change or close.“

still happens with the grants and loans given directly to students and won’t change by eliminating those programs. I was surprised to learn the 2 year school went to closed last summer. In fact a number of UW campuses were closed. Not enough students to make them work. Eliminating these programs will lower education costs.

I agree, the government shouldn’t be in the education business. At no point should the taxpayers be on the hook for student loans.

People started throwing sports into this discussion and my first thought was “there are thousands of schools that don’t have these “big money sports” or any sports. Kids are free to choose those schools. There’s even a couple of schools that don’t take federal money the kids are free to choose.

^^^ Yes, there is competitive pressure between schools currently. But without the federal money so freely available, the competition would be stiff between schools. That would force schools to become more competitive, to improve... or close.
Of course, you'd have leftists whining about all the schools closing.

I think your system would be better than what we have now, but I think it's more complicated than it needs to be.

I believe if we just got the Government out of the student loan process completely it would straighten itself out. Stop federally guaranteeing the loans, and let the colleges underwrite the risk for the loans they give out. If the risk was on the colleges rather than subsidized by the taxpayer, they would very quickly stop loaning out tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars toward degrees that they know have little chance of ever paying it back.

I remember sitting in one of my classes my Freshman year, the professor told us very plainly that only 10% of us would end up employed in our field. That's not saying the field isn't useful, but it doesn't seem like a degree with that kind of chance for employment should be subsidized by the taxpayer.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
But without the federal money so freely available, the competition would be stiff between schools. That would force schools to become more competitive, to improve... or close.
Of course, you'd have leftists whining about all the schools closing.

OK, I’m starting to catch on. Kids with low grades, poor test scores, and no money won’t be able to afford the schools that would admit them and those schools would close. Schools like UoM, UF, UCLA, UT, etc. would be unaffected.

quote:

Kids with low grades, poor test scores, and no money won’t be able to afford the schools that would admit them and those schools would close.

Maybe more of those kids should go to a trade school? We've got to get over this idea that everyone should go to college... and that the government should pay for or finance it.

Trade schools cost money, but I’m all for kids going to trade school. One my son’s friends goes to welding school which is just fantastic. The local high school is building an airplane hanger on their campus and will training kids to be A&Ps.

By kids with no money, I’m not saying poor, but rather kids that didn’t take the initiative, get jobs in high school, and save something.

It'd be nice if everyone had a great high school guidance counselor, but that's another couple of stories.