The OSU sports money machine

<p>I don't see the connection to foreclosure activity at all. What exactly does that have to do with OSU sports?? Should they be having fundraisers to bail people out of bad loan decisions??</p>

<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119275242417864220.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119275242417864220.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Perhaps OSU should scale way back on its academic program or maybe do away with it altogether. It's clear that academics are draining resources and attention away from the school's primary mission of creating and perpetuating a sports juggernaut.</p>

<p>Why should we "bail out" the academic program? They really don't need it. ;)</p>

<p>OSU should follow Florida State's lead:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/node/52822%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.theonion.com/content/node/52822&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I hired an outside consultant in Columbus on a case once who became a personal friend. He wanted to show the trial team the OSU stadium. He made us walk to the very top row (in our business clothes, heels etc) so that we could fully appreciate the place! I'll never forget that. (it really was pretty cool)</p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't see the connection to foreclosure activity at all. What exactly does that have to do with OSU sports?? Should they be having fundraisers to bail people out of bad loan decisions??

[/quote]

I see a connection. Both sports juggernauts and real estate bubbles are funded by optimists who pour money into a growing trend. OSU is #1 in the polls (I haven't checked todays scores yet), but meanwhile the real estate market is having a bad year. I'm sure if OSU has a few bad years, there could be some trimming going on in Columbus. Perhaps someone will reposess that hockey treadmill? I'd love to buy it cheap on eBay!</p>

<p>I know what you are asking Barrons. It is a typical rhetorical tactic used by a writer who uses unreleated stories of success and failure to drive a wedge in a population. Unfortunately, those weakened by their own life experiences are quick to follow those who find scapegoats.</p>

<p>OH! IO!
GO BUCKS!!! </p>

<p>Of course, I'm not biased. After all, I would have been more than happy to pay the full 4 year ride my D has compliments of the OSU athletic program! LOL!</p>

<p>Madville, sweet!!!!</p>

<p>8-0.</p>

<p>and in 6 more days it will be 8-1. WE ARE...</p>

<p>PSU football pays for itself. I assume Ohio football is also self funded. Anyone know?</p>

<p>An article in Friday's Wall St Journal discussed the economics of OSU sports program. It is fully self-supporting and spends more than $90K/student/year, about three times as much as is spent on academics.</p>

<p>My question is: is that the message we really want to send to college students?</p>

<p>Yes. I don't see a problem. The sports program makes money. It adds prestige to the school. OSU is getting more applicants and better students into the school. There are many students that want the big time sports program. These students are not all dummies.</p>

<p>If you don't want the big time sports programs, you can go somewhere else. There are plenty of choices out there. I like the big time sports programs.</p>

<p>Athletics v. Academics is not a zero-sum game. You can have both... Look at Michigan, UVA, and UCLA.</p>

<p>Stanford just spent, how much, to redo the football stadium?</p>

<p>A couple of months ago, I saw Chelsea play soccer against one of the top teams from Mexico at the new Stanford stadium. </p>

<p>Pretty nice stadium.</p>

<p>
[quote]
My question is: is that the message we really want to send to college students?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You bet.
Colleges will dump millions into programs that have affiliations with major sport conferences. Having the exposure from a successful sports team or program pays for itself in spades. Most colleges couldn't pay for that type of media coverage. Sport teams, especially successful ones bring lots of well desired publicity. Now you have major conferences with their own networks giving more exposure to schools while making a fortune. It's mutually beneficial for the school and the public.</p>

<p>My question is:</p>

<p>Is the athletic department in the black or in the red.</p>

<p>If you are spending 1 billion on the athletic department, but bringing in 1,000,000,001 it makes more sense for the school that an athletic department with a 10 dollar budget that is losing all ten of those dollars.</p>

<p>And there is certainly value added through athletics and the facilities, and so on. Those posh dorms - also have to be available to the rest of the student body. New weight rooms, more facilities, fun saturdays, all good.</p>

<p>It's an interesting article. I'm impressed that OSU fields 36 varsity teams and only two of them (men's basketball and football) generate a profit.

[quote]
OSU says its athletic department is self-sufficient -- it uses sports revenues to pay for its teams and operations. It doesn't draw from the same budget that's used to fund academic departments. How much the athletic department spends is determined by how much it brings in, not by how much the university decides to give it. .....At Ohio State, "nonrevenue" sports such as men's lacrosse and women's track don't have to worry about earning their funding.....The football and men's basketball programs at OSU are the only sports there that turn a profit -- and their revenues support teams other universities have eliminated for lack of funding.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, I realize that colleges think that sports bring in students... the message OSU seems to be sending, though, is that students in sports are worth more than students in academics. OSU spends NONE of its sports money outside the sports program (at least from appearances).</p>

<p>dmd, That's like a school saying well we made this money using the choir member's talent, but we're going to spend it on the Rec Center instead of putting it back into the choir. It makes no sense.</p>

<p>From the article:
[quote]
A significant chunk of the athletic department's budget is spent in ways that benefit the school's general fund. This year, the athletic department will spend $12 million on scholarships or "Grant-in-Aid" to pay for athletes' tuitions. A few years ago, the department contributed $5 million to help fund renovations to the campus's main library. **OSU's sports program is also among the few that pays for all maintenance, security and operating costs at its facilities. <a href="The%20utilities%20bill%20at%20the%20football%20stadium%20last%20year:%20$731,309.">/b</a> In addition, the athletic department transfers about $1.7 million to the school's academic-support center to pay for tutors and "life skills" workshops for athletes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>We could discuss whether they should give more. We could also discuss why more people in America buy football tickets rather than, say, symphony tickets.</p>

<p>As the program appears to be self-sufficient, why does it matter how much they are spending. They aren't taking away from your education, only adding to it. Most schools have athletic departments that are not self-suffiecient, and are a larger drain on the school than this massive department.</p>