<p>Politicians are reminding the taxpayers that we are subsidizing these expensive athletic empires:</p>
<p>
[quote]
WASHINGTON -- An influential member of Congress is questioning whether the NCAA Division I empire, with its multimillion-dollar television contracts and million-dollar coaches, deserves its tax-exempt status.</p>
<p>"From the standpoint of a federal taxpayer, why should the federal government subsidize the athletic activities of educational institutions when that subsidy is being used to help pay for escalating coaches' salaries, costly chartered travel and state-of-the-art athletic facilities?" asked Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Would the country be better off if college athletics were organized on a more modest scale, and the resources diverted elsewhere? </p>
<p>The article mentions that there are division I basketball programs that cost $600K per player.</p>
<p>With that distorted basis for comparison, I can understand why wrestling seems "cheap" by comparison at $10K per player. </p>
<p>I feel like the boy pointing at the emperor to say he has no clothes.</p>
<p>Whatever the benefits of taxpayer-subsidized NCAA Division I programs (whether basketball or wrestling), in a country in which 45 million people don't have medical insurance coverage, Division I sports are way below a lot of other things on this taxpayer's list of social priorities!</p>