Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

sports.espn.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 74 posts

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#21

Post by bbgm »

parfe wrote: post #11
burgerbrain wrote: post #3

I will never understand what quality education and sports have in common. In fact, with the rate of brain-damage suffered by american football players, I suspect sports are actually a detriment to education, not even counting the resources they suck from it. EDIT: Another case against college sports, and sports scholarships: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/26/drexel-basketball-r...

I will never understand what quality education and sports have in common. Ever seen 50,000 alumni show up on campus for a theoretical physics conference?

> Ever seen 50,000 alumni show up on campus for a theoretical physics conference?

One can be Utopian and wish for that day.

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#22

Post by aspir »

absconditus wrote: post #18
aspir wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've personally seen more 1 generation college attendees in my athletics career circle than not; they're not ignorant jocks trying to skate into the pros, they're trying to better their standing by any means necessary. Most athletes also understand that they "go pro in something other than sports," to steal the NCAA tagline. Ask your alma mater's department heads, deans and development officers if sports matters. Res…

So basically if your school does not provide a great education then rely on sports to keep things going.

Exactly -- keep things going.

The money has to come from somewhere. It's the equivalent of state school's MVP. My alma mater, Oklahoma, did the very thing. Their engineering's growing by leaps and bounds, and has had the #1 meteorological research program in the world, and also secured the National Weather Center. CS hasn't grown as aggressively, but it is still growing.

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#25

Post by micks56 »

burgerbrain wrote: post #17
aspir wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've personally seen more 1 generation college attendees in my athletics career circle than not; they're not ignorant jocks trying to skate into the pros, they're trying to better their standing by any means necessary. Most athletes also understand that they "go pro in something other than sports," to steal the NCAA tagline. Ask your alma mater's department heads, deans and development officers if sports matters. Res…

This is and always has been a terrible argument. Academic scholarships will always be a better use of money. There is no reason those first generation students can't get the attention of schools with academic excellence instead of sports, particularly if they are generally as bright as you claim.

Not every lesson or piece of information can be learned from a book or in a classroom. Good luck getting soft skills there.

Real learning occurs while playing sports. Soft skills, discipline, teamwork, personal fitness, and long-time dedication are just a few areas where sports help the whole person.

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#26

Post by aspir »

burgerbrain wrote: post #17
aspir wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've personally seen more 1 generation college attendees in my athletics career circle than not; they're not ignorant jocks trying to skate into the pros, they're trying to better their standing by any means necessary. Most athletes also understand that they "go pro in something other than sports," to steal the NCAA tagline. Ask your alma mater's department heads, deans and development officers if sports matters. Res…

This is and always has been a terrible argument. Academic scholarships will always be a better use of money. There is no reason those first generation students can't get the attention of schools with academic excellence instead of sports, particularly if they are generally as bright as you claim.

You forget that their home infrastructure if low quality. For example: most low income students that I knew didn't know that the FAFSA was important until it was too late for their freshman year.

Also, they usually had average grades and test scores as well. They just worked hard in college to try to get a good job.

Many still had to take out college loans as well -- athletes aren't all 100% scholarshipped. Most are luck to get books covered. I know this potentially still applies to your argument, but I respectfully feel that your arguments are based on distanced observation alone.

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#27

Post by aspir »

aspir wrote: post #22
absconditus wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically if your school does not provide a great education then rely on sports to keep things going.

Exactly -- keep things going. The money has to come from somewhere. It's the equivalent of state school's MVP. My alma mater, Oklahoma, did the very thing. Their engineering's growing by leaps and bounds, and has had the #1 meteorological research program in the world, and also secured the National Weather Center. CS hasn't grown as aggressively, but it is still growing.

To the downvoter -- universities have to keep their doors open before they can improve. If sports didn't assist with the donations and revenue process in a net positive, they wouldn't spend in their current manner.

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#28

Post by fourspace »

ajays wrote: post #8

One of the big reasons Universities compete in sports is to attract alumni donors. If you just look at it at a micro level, the direct expense on sports is probably more than the revenue from sports. But if you factor in alumni donations, then I've heard that the benefits far outweigh the costs. I was in a Division II school, and they made a big push to get into Division I. And the main reason they gave was to get al…

The article address this fallacy. More often than not, those alumni donors are giving money to the athletic booster programs, not the school's academic programs. As a result, everyone who attends the university and pays tuition pays for the athletic program, even though only a small percentage actually play sports.

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#29

Post by micks56 »

burgerbrain wrote: post #14
parfe wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will never understand what quality education and sports have in common. Ever seen 50,000 alumni show up on campus for a theoretical physics conference?

Excellent point. People showing up to a school for non-academic reasons clearly provide an academic benefit... Not. I also haven't seen a theoretical physics conference gather dozens students late on a Friday night, but that doesn't mean kegs are good for education.

Should we also cancel the drama program, debate team, musical ensembles, and school newspaper?

Re: Nearly All US Universities Lose Money on Sports

#30

Post by jhaglund »

micks56 wrote: post #29
burgerbrain wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excellent point. People showing up to a school for non-academic reasons clearly provide an academic benefit... Not. I also haven't seen a theoretical physics conference gather dozens students late on a Friday night, but that doesn't mean kegs are good for education.

Should we also cancel the drama program, debate team, musical ensembles, and school newspaper?

Of course not. The question is does the amount we spend on athletics (millions) really do anything for academics? No one is saying athletics have no place in university. But why are we spending so much on it, compared to the drama program, debate team, musical ensembles, and school newspaper? When those subjects which tie into academics better than athletics.
Post reply on HN