It’s good to see that during these tough economic times, we have our priorities straight when it comes to funding higher education:
Though he has yet to sign a contract, Steve Sarkisian has a “memorandum of understanding” with Washington.
Annual guaranteed compensation:
Year Salary 2009 $1,750,000 2010 $1,875,000 2011 $2,000,000 2012 $2,100,000 2013 $2,300,000 Incentive compensation: He will reach incentives if the Huskies play in a bowl game ($150,000), win the Pac-10 ($350,000), play in a BCS bowl or win the national title. He also can make up to $250,000 a year if the team meets certain academic standards.
Other compensation: includes standard UW employee benefits; the use of two vehicles, moving expenses; club membership.
I’m just sayin’….
The University of Washington: You’re putting something into it, whether you know it or not.
Just when I think you’re a halfway honest guy, Goldy… You put a BS UW story at the top in order to push the Blagojevich corruption scandal down the page. BTW, did you read how Blagojevich promised an Obama favor to the SEIU if he was appointed to head up Change to Win? Let’s see just how far this thing goes!
As for Sarkisian’s salary, he’s one of the few state employees that brings in more revenue than he costs the state. According to one report I read, 85% of the entire athletic department budget (including all of the Title IX sports) is paid for by football — and Sarkisian’s salary is paid for by football revenues. That money isn’t being taken away from academics.
AF @ 1
No, you’re not paying one dime for Sarkisian’s salary. It is paid for by football revenues.
But you’d know that if you actually had an education.
2:
Put this on top to drive the other story down?
Mark, take the tin foil off the windows, take your mom’s bra off your head and back away from the keyboard. Try to think.
I know it hurts, but try. You might actually clear the conspiracy paranoia from your head.
Then again……maybe not so much.
Don’t forget that Neuheisal’s litigation brought to light some of the other income sources available to U.W. coaches – payments by radio and TV for their programs reviewing Saturday’s game, as well as coaching clinics using U.W. facilities and trademarks without any compensation to the U.W. (which would in any other setting be a violation of state law). I don’t remember the details, but the amounts weren’t anything to sneeze at.
It’s also not unheard-of for college football coaches to become paid board members of any variety of athletic organizations, both for-profit and non-profit.
And yes, football brings in more money than it spends, but it also has a huge share of the athletic department expenses, also. It costs an incredible amount of money to field 50-80 scholarship athletes, provide them with a stadium and practice facilities, multiple coaches and trainers, travel to away games, etc. In addition, football requires more than it’s share of additional NCAA compliance oversight personnel, alumni liasons, academic tutoring, etc.
What I’m concerned about is an “arms race” to see which universities can offer the most money to winning coaches. Eventually this may result in football NOT supplying any additional money to the athletic departments, and provide even more of a corrupting influence on coaches to “win at any cost”, NCAA regulations and player’s health be damned.
One of the reasons why women’s sports have expanded under Title IX is because courts have interpreted that law to require a college or university to make sure that there are an equal number of athletic scholarships given to both men and women. Since football offers such a large number of scholarships, some colleges and universities have been hard-pressed to expand their women’s athletic programs to match. A lot of mid-western colleges have started rowing programs toward that end, whereas others have turned “cheer”, raquetball, and lacross into varsity sports.
The Athletic Department at the UW is self sustaining. Heck, Football provides funding for most of the other sports the UW competes in. So it’s important to have a good coach, lest the UW require state funds for it’s program, like WSU.
And if you’re concerned about an arms race, the people funding it are rich boosters, not the state.
rhp6033,
It isn’t about football supplying “additional money to athletic departments.” Football revenues — around $30 million per year — pay for 85% of the UW’s entire athletic budget. The only other major revenue player is men’s basketball, which brings in about $10 million per year. Every other sport is a money loser. Women’s basketball, for example, posts a net loss of around $1 million every year.
You could pay a winning coach $10 million per year and football would still make a significant net profit.
Personally, I think we should get rid of college sports all together. It’s a royally F’d up world when people are willing to shell out millions to pay for football while teaching and nursing programs are chronically underfund
Is winning at football really more important than teaching science to 3rd graders or having full nursing staffs at hospitals?
Like it or not, UW is a major BCS conference football program (albeit a really bad one), and $1.5 million is actually cheap for a coach these days; the average in the SEC, for example, is over $1 million a year more. WSU’s new coach is one of the lowest-paid coaches in a major conference. Consider yourself lucky that UW is such a train wreck, both in terms of facilities and competitiveness (not to mention the insane expectations of boosters weaned on Don James), that it couldn’t attract the big names people wanted. They would have cost $4 or $5 mil a year.
Salaries of the 69 highest paid college football coaches:
1 Bob Stoops Oklahoma $6,500,000
2 Charlie Weis Notre Dame $4,200,000
3 Pete Carroll USC $4,000,000
4 Les Miles LSU $3,751,000
5 Nick Saban Alabama $3,750,000
6 Jim Tressel Ohio State $3,500,000
7 Urban Meyer Florida $3,400,000
8 Kirk Ferentz Iowa $3,030,000
9 Mack Brown Texas $2,910,000
10 Bobby Petrino Arkansas $2,850,000
11 Tommy Tuberville Auburn $2,825,000
12 Mark Richt Georgia $2,800,000
13 Rich Rodriguez Michigan $2,500,000
14 Bobby Bowden Florida State $2,500,000
15 Philip Fulmer Tennessee $2,400,000
16 Mark Mangino Kansas $2,300,000
17 Greg Schiano Rutgers $2,250,000
18 Mike Bellotti Oregon $2,100,000
19 Frank Beamer Virginia Tech $2,100,000
20 Butch Davis North Carolina $2.100,000
21 June Jones SMU $2,000,000
22 Al Groh Virginia $1,875,000
23 Gary Pinkel Missouri $1,875,000
24 Tommy Bowden Clemson $1,850,000
25 Jeff Tedford California $1,850,000
26 Mike Sherman Texas A&M $1,800,000
27 Art Briles Baylor $1,800,000
28 Joe Tiller Purdue $1,800,000
29 Steve Spurrier South Carolina $1,800,000
30 Ralph Friedgen Maryland $1,750,000
31 Mike Leach Texas Tech $1,750,000
32 Houston Nutt Ole Miss $1,700,000
33 Sylvester Croom Mississippi State $1,700,000
34 Paul Johnson Georgia Tech $1,600,000
35 Joe Paterno Penn State $1,500,000
36 Randy Edsall Connecticut $1,500,000
37 David Cutcliffe Duke $1,500,000
38 Randy Shannon Miami $1,500,000
39 Jim Leavitt USF $1,500,000
40 Jeff Jagodzinski Boston College $1,500,000
41 Ty Willingham Washington $1,470,000
42 Steve Kragthorpe Louisville $1,450,000
43 Bret Bielema Wisconsin $1,400,000
44 Ron Zook Illinois $1,350,000
45 Gary Patterson TCU $1,300,000
46 Rick Neuheisel UCLA $1,250,000
47 Pat Hill Fresno State $1,250,000
48 Brian Kelly Cincinnati $1,200,000
49 Dave Wannstedt Pitt $1,200,000
50 Jim Grobe Wake Forest $1,200,000
51 Skip Holtz East Carolina $1,160,000
52 Mark Dantonio Michigan State $1,150,000
53 George O’Leary UCF $1,150,000
54 Dennis Erickson Arizona State $1,100,000
55 Bo Pelini Nebraska $1,100,000
56 Todd Graham Tulsa $1,100,000
57 Tom O’Brien NC State $1,100,000
58 Greg McMackin Hawaii $1,100,000
59 Dan Hawkins Colorado $1,100,000
60 Mike Riley Oregon State $1,100,000
61 Gene Chizik Iowa State $1,100,000
62 Ron Prince Kansas State $1,100,000
63 Greg Robinson Syracuse $1,100,000
64 Rich Brooks Kentucky $1,075,000
65 Mike Gundy Oklahoma State $1,050,000
66 Mike Stoops Arizona $1,025,000
67 Tim Brewster Minnesota $1,000,000
68 Jim Harbaugh Stanford $1,000,000
69 Bobby Johnson Vanderbilt $1,000,000
$6,500,000 to win a game. Stupid.
Michael @ 8
Are you not paying attention? There is NO state money going to football. In fact, football pays for most of the other sports that enrich the lives of our boys and girls.
To an extent, academic programs BENEFIT from athletic programs because sports, like other aspects of school atmosphere, contribute to the desirability of a school. And they are entirely self-sustaining.
I can tell you as someone who attends at least a couple of games a year, that money is taken from an “entertainment budget.” The money goes to the UW instead of the Seahawks, a concert or Hollywood. The only way those dollars could go directly to the expenditures you mention would be to raise taxes — and that is probably what you’d prefer anyway.
What the government should really do is take away all that “1% for art” money and give it to the schools. The 1% for art should pay for grade school fingerpainting and not some overpaid, untalented, otherwise-unemployable “artist” who thinks that welding together old bike parts and chain link fence makes a political statement.
Goldy, America’s mercantilist society obviously values football coaches more than political bloggers, but maybe there are some unexploited endorsement opportunities out there that you could tap into?
@12
Yes, yes, yes, I know there’s no state money going into football. That’s why I didn’t post a comment to the effect of, “gosh, it’s too bad state money goes to football.”
My comment was about messed up societal priorities. Priorities that seem to place watching sports above learning.
I bet there’s a cheaper and better way to fund the sports that football is currently funding as well. Or, we could ditch them all and get back to basics for a bit.
@12
.
Actually, no. I favor sitting down and thinking about what our society values and what we’d like our world to look like, rather than bouncing around and reacting to the latest stimuli. Maybe that means more taxes. Maybe that means fewer taxes. Maybe that means we continue on, on our current track; but, I doubt that.
We’ve got some major thinking to do if we don’t want to become part of the 3rd world. I doubt the changes that need to be made will leave room for our college and pro-sports programs to remain the way they are.
don’t foget the state pays only a portion…..the boosters, shoes and media pay most of it
These folks seem to be doing okay without a sports program or a big branding effort.
http://www.paris-sorbonne.fr/en/
They even have ski and snowboard trips under student life.
@9
Fuck, that shit. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t try to change something we don’t like.
@17— Ran out of time.
They still have ski and snowboard trips under student life. I’m not arguing that anything other than being in a classroom is bad.
This tells us all we need to know about the “values” of guys like Ron Crockett.
No, he does not value “education” as much as he values the unique vicarious thrill he experiences watching a chemically altered date rapist perform sanctioned violent assault. Yes, it is a game. But that does not explain the bizarre attachment of millionaires to the promotion of this spectacle.
Who cares where the money comes from. Schools should be about learning, not about playing games. Let the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc run their own apprenticeship programs and let them do it off campus.
Unfortunately for most college programs is athlete-student not student athlete. I wonder what UW’s football graduation rate is? Also, wasn’t there a scandal a few years back over some players getting off for some crimes.
You see Puddy remembers when libtards forget!
Let’s see if the new coach keeps them clean on and off the field…
@22 “You see Puddy remembers when libtards forget!”
In your dreams, goatfucker.
I have forgotten more than Puddy ever “knew”.
When you know so little, it ain’t hard not to forget it…now , where were those dang keys….
puddy @ 22 “I wonder what UW’s football graduation rate is?”
According to the NCAA:
The graduation rate of a UW Class of 2001/2002 student (entire student body) is 75%.
The graduation rate of a UW student-athlete from the same class is 77%.
The four-class average is 68% for student-athletes and 75% for the student body as a whole.
The UW has the second-best graduation success rate of any public school on the West Coast.
UW info:
http://gohuskies.cstv.com/genrel/101408aad.html
NCAA in general:
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?ContentID=39115
@2 Real Mark
Sorry. The F team only brings in money IFF you assume that it has no indirect costs.
The only arguments for it in so far as $$ are concerned is that the UW would do even less well with the State if we did not have a pro team.
No more than one team in the US makes money. This si worse if you add in little things like instructional costs, police, and real estate.
@25 TRM
Yes they graduate but a huge proportion do so in what amount to special majors that do nto prepare them for any job.
Moreover, The team is terribly racist. About 1/2 of all UW AA are professional athletes .. a terrible messsge to send to WA state kids.
14
Michal
STATE MONET DOES GO TO FOOTBALL UNLESS YOU THINK POLICE AND JANITORS WORK FOR FREE. Not only that, because we have these pro team, WA state kids do not get to compete, we have a terrible in state athletic program.
BTW
The AD had talked of a 6 million dollar salary.
Don’t forget…he’ll be taxed at 35 cents on the dollar. It’s a great salary, alright, but he won’t be keeping a big chunk of it. That 35 percent will presumably be used to ‘spread the wealth around’, yes?
@14…Michael…
So, you’re against a free country? Where people make choices in the marketplace on how to allocate resources they own?
Here’s a thought…sell all you have and give it to nurses and teachers, then you will have treasure in your version of heaven on earth.
In the meantime, quit running down others who exercise their free right to make choices different than yours – who choose without your approval.
It’s still a free country last time I checked.
The Piper
And Goldy’s just jealous because he can’t rake in even a tenth of those bucks as a blogger.
Well, if he had a better than hen scratch business plan and got out and sold ads on the thing, maybe he’d make a buck or two.
Free enterprise, Goldy – it’s been in all the papers, and it works!
The Piper
It goes to show when libtards make fun of you there is so much truth in my original post!
Steve, HAs’ resident goatherder and goatbutt checker:
Stop projecting Steve.
Now wait for it……….
yelling loser boy will tell libtards not to take orders from me.
yelling loser boy – tell us about Obama being the most liberal senator again…
Goldy spews:….’I’m just sayin’…. (read headline)
Funny how hypocritical this thread is. 40 hour a week employment continues to elude Goldy, yet he feels like his opinion matters to slam someone that actually has a real job-regardless of it’s compensation. Ranks right up there with non-contributing members of society; also unemployed, such as O.C.D. sufferers Roger Rodent and “YLB” who lives in his Momma’s basement. All opinions amount to flatulence in the wind as a result. Come have a legitimate opinion when you (or if) you get gainfull employment Goldy. Until then, you mean nothing and are nothing-an example: not being able to fix your own simple plumbing problems or want to pay full price for someone that can. Typical ignorant liberal. Whatever happened to Ditzy Darcy BTW? Oh wait, I think she served me coffee this morning. Now that’s a profession deserving of her massive “experience” and “intelligence”, but at least that’s employment.
@31
WTF????? Really. Your comment had nothing even close anything to do with my post.
@35
You forgot to insult me.
So, what happens if the UW football team loses its TV contracts, people stop going to the games and they can’t pay their bills. Are the taxpayers of the great state of Washington on the hook for what the Athletic Department owes?
@28
Wouldn’t the pay for the hours that cops, janitors Etc, work for the Athletic Department come out of the Athletic Department’s budget?
@31
What, I don’t have a free right (I thought free rights applied to driving your car?) to run down others? I’m mean it’s a free country and all. Not that I actually ran down (are we talking about budgets or drivers Ed here) anyone.
@39 Michael
I have only seen the athletics budgets twice over the years. It never has done much better than break even and that was w/o the indirect costs.
In contrast, every grant and research contract on campus, besides employing students and all that, pays about 60% overhead. This goes to cover admin costs, heat, light, cops, the President, etc etc.
I honestly see nothing wrong with the State running an entertainment except for 3 problems:
1. Racism, If you are Black, you need t throw hoops to get into the UW, or so it appears.
2. College athletics. because we are a small state, these semi pro teams recruit the best elsewhere and we shut out our own kids.
3. Budget in bad times the misapprehension that we get $$ from football hurts the perception of our real needs.
Finally, isn’t it unseeml;y for the State, with its responsibilities to the young, poor, etc. to be supporting, even at limited cost, an entertainment?
How about this, why not tax football seats and other revenues and use the tax to pay academic scholarships?
34 – Stupes, I don’t take orders from a losing worshipper of right wing bullshit like you.
SJ @ 26 & elsewhere
“The F team only brings in money IFF you assume that it has no indirect costs.”
$15 million in football net profits pays for a heck of a lot of indirect costs. If you want to say that, as a whole, the entire athletic department might rely on indirect benefits, you may have more of an argument, but from the budget documents I’ve seen, the athletic department is self-sustaining — right down to utilities and “institutional overhead” of $2.5 million.
The atheltic department budget also provides scholarships to, IIRC, about 600+ student-athletes — money that doesn’t come back to the athletic department, but goes to the school for academics and other typical student expenses. So, the athletic department DOES pay a share of the indirect expenses proportional to the number of student athletes.
Besides, if athletics suddenly disappeared, what non-athletic department jobs would be cut? You’d still have the entire school administration because compliance folks are paid out of the athletic budget.
SeattleJew: The graduating football players could work for the SEIU. I’m sure yelling loser boy’s wife has great contacts.
Loser@42: Right on time.
Thanks for playing…
Actually, Sarkisian’s salary will be paid from the pool of individual donations from the school’s biggest boosters in the Tyee Club, as Lorenzo Romar’s is. As a rule, this explains why football and basketball coaches make more than governors and legislators without anyone raising that much of a fuss about it.
While such boosters can be quite a blessing (ask Oklahoma State – T. Boone Pickens dropped $25 million a few years back on their football program), the downside of this is that boosters can wind up becoming too powerful within a university’s athletic program, which brings about its own set of ah, unique problems.
Billy Joe Hobert, please pick up the white courtesy phone…….
@43 TRM
However you cut and dice it, the pre-professional athletics program is not a money maker unless you accept the hypothesis that it generates contributions ot other campus activities and that we do “better” in Olympia because of the program.
Getting at the numbers is not entirely easy as some of them are hidden in a private foundation that claims not to be subject to the State’s disclosure rules. All I can tell you is that in many presentations by the UW admin, in a detailed commentary I sat in on with the former President of U Indiana, and in a lengthy NY Times review of this subject everything I have told you was fact.
This does NOT say that the program is a net cost. I suspect it is not. Of more concern to em is whether the program actually serves the people of the State. What is its function?
1. A public amusement, a source of state pride.
I think this is a legitimate argument, BUT, if this is proper what are the limits on state funded amusements. Would you support a Wastate funded profession basketball team, assuming it made money?
How about supporting ORCA, a WASTATE 12 meter for the next America’s Cup?
Or having the State build casinos in depressed areas?
2. Athletic Opportunities for WASTATE kids?? I do not know the numbers but I can tell you that vanishingly few UW kids consider the teams (not just effball) as part of the student body or even think about competing for a slot.
3. Athletics is part of education, I think that idea has merit and should be asked in more detail. What I do NOT see is much of an effort to make it function this way. The contrast with other UW profit centers (The med School and B school esp), there seems to be no real effort to use the teams for educational purposes.
As a small example, wouldn’t it be very cool if the Husky players (all sports) were cared for by a UW sports medicine clinic? Think of the marketing synergism for UW medicine.
Another example is the LACK of academic leadership in the AD. The AD is the only student program not subjected to the Faculty Code. This means that Coach Wllingham can be and was fired without any review or discussion of his failures and successes as a mentor for young people.
4. A Program for a Special Group of Students. Again this may not be bad thing if student athletes comprise a special need for focus BUT, it would be nice to see data that the AD is serving the needs of WA State’s own cadre. A further issue in this regard is the all to obvious issue of racism when, at least as it appear, such a huge percentage of UW minorities are supported by athletic scholarships.
Finally, let me offer a dirty F word: FACULTY. The Coaches may also be unique in the State of WAS in not complying with the rules on “outside” activities. For contrast, there are very strenuous rules about the UW faculty. NO faculty member is supposed to use her identity to make off campus profits w/o admin approval and for many things there are caps on how much can be made.
How would you feel if the head of the ferry system were to contract with Time Warner for a TV series about his adventures? Should he be paid the $$? Would Boeing or MS allow a similar deal?
The bottom line is that the structure of football is essentially of an untaxed, income producing entity with free US of State facilities. The potential and too often the reality of abuse is worrisome.
SJ @ 47
You first statement is unclear. How do you define “money maker?”
If it isn’t a cost to the school itself or the state, why do you care?
I would argue that the sports program, at the very least, provides millions of dollars each year in education funding for the 600+ scholar-athletes. Those are millions of dollars that don’t have to be spent on financial aid programs, etc.
To what “private foundation” do you refer?
You seem to have something against football in particular. Are you harboring a resentment that you never made the team in high school and/or college? (No, I didn’t play team sports.)
Simple question: If the UW athletic department closed up shop tomorrow, would it be a net benefit or detriment to the school? To the people of the city and/or state?
Loser @ 45
Just stating the objective truth. You are a loser and a slavish repeater of right wing myths. Thanks for months upon months of entertainment.
@48 TRM
1, Money … the critical issue is that the AD is often touted as being a source of money. That is certainly not true.
2. The student athletes COST the UW money. These are expensive students and all tuition, esp undergrad, is subsidized byt the State. Noone would be upset from the academic side if these were not there.
3. I care because I am both a citizen, a parent and a member of the UW family. I want us to get the best use we can of this place abd see a number of ways the football program does NOT carry it own weight, esp in re reacism.
4. There is more than one. The main UW has them as well. These are private entities that provide funding for various activities outside the view of the State. If you want actual names you can get them easily via the web.
5. Nope. I have nothing against football. It can be fun to watch. My question is whether the UW and the State should be in this as a business and whether as a UW activity it serves the central functions of this place.
6.
This is not a very sensible question. There are many different kinds of athletic departments. Harvard, MIT, Seattle Univ, .. everything but Antioch has some sort of atheltic program.
My own preference would be to tilt the program more toward our state and toward real students. So the real issue would be what would happen if the Huskies were in a different conference with higher academic standards and more emphasis on in state kids.
What do you think? Would a conference that included Stanford, UW, WSU, U Va, UNC, Tufts, Gonzaga, U Mass work for you?
@46
I’m blown away that someone can see a sport or team as so important that the can drop 25M on it. If your team wins the big bowl game what changes in the world? Who’s really bettered by this? I just don’t get it.
I’m not anti-sport. I think schools and communities need MORE intramural sports so that everyone can get out and be an active participant.
SJ @ 50
1. They run a surplus some years and a deficit in others, but they’re not a burden on the school. They ARE a source of scholarships for 600+ students who might not otherwise be able to afford the UW.
2. How do you figure that a student-athlete costs the UW any more than any other student? The UW budget submitted to the NCAA clearly shows that the athletic program pays for itself. If the athletic department pays out a full-ride scholarship, the school and/or the state is subsidizing no more and no less than they would any other student. The ONLY thing you could argue would be whether the student deserved to be at the UW — and that is a whole ‘nother argument, especially considering that they’re not exactly choosing from the top SAT scores on down.
3. So, your argument is going way beyond mere finances. Racism? Are you saying we should have a quota for Asians on the basketball team? Sports is the one place where no program worth anything will turn you away if you can play. OTOH, you DO have racism in academics at the UW. I personally know a good-grade white guy who was refused registration for a couple of classes (a number of years ago) because the empty seats had to be set aside just in case a non-white person wanted to attend — even after classes had started for the quarter.
4. Those organizations are irrelevant to this discussion unless they’re costing the school money. AFAIK, they’re only GIVING money to the school and/or athletic department. Unless you’re talking about rules violations, it shouldn’t matter if they’re paying for desks or basketballs. And if you want to talk about undue influence, let’s talk about big-dollar donations to schools for programs designed to indoctrinate students in Far Left thinking.
5. I could see your point if the department — especially football — wasn’t self-sustaining. However, the only real drags on the system are the minor sports that nobody is willing to pay to see.
6. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the athletic department seems to do well at graduating student-athletes. The UW has the second-highest rate of any public university on the West Coast.
WSU? In an “academic” conference? I thought we were having a serious discussion. Stanford already is in the conference and the Zags are fine with me. UVA, UNC et al would make for difficult travel. Remember, though, that the UW is a public university. The fact that it is already academically competitive with private schools is nothing to scoff at.
Yup, Pickens dropped 25 mil on his alma mater’s football program. He can afford it, after all. IIRC, it went mostly towards facilities on-campus, namely an indoor practice facility (Stillwater, OK can get a mite cold and blustery in the winter). I wouldn’t be surprised if the facility is also used year-round for other athletic purposes when the football team isn’t using it, like intramural athletics and such. When I went to WSU, virtually every sporting facility short of the basketball arena was used for intramurals throughout the year, even Martin Stadium.
I had put together a long post on this yesterday, but it never got posted and I didn’t have the time to re-write it all. Here’s part of it.
I have somewhat of a unique perspective on this issue, as my daughter was an NCAA Div. I athletic scholarship recipient in rowing. She didn’t go to the U.W., she went to an out-of-state university, because they offered her the best deal. Unfortunately, she found she had a congenital defect in her knees which couldn’t stand the strain of 6+ hours a day of training at that level, and she had to drop rowing (at a college level) and is now finishing her education at the U.W.
The U.W. rowing programs are among the best in the country. The women’s program is definately in a “rebuilding” period, but they still make it to nationals every year. The men’s program is the defending national champion.
Because Title IX requires colleges to offer as many athletic scholarships to women as it does men, and because the football team burns up so many scholarships for men, many colleges and universities have been building rowing programs so they can offer rowing scholarships to women. Ironically, this means that the men’s rowers typically don’t receive scholarships, are not varsity sports (“club sports”, instead), and are governed by FISA, not the NCAA. The men’s program DOES benefit in an off-hand way – rowing facilities and equipment, such as the U.W.’s new shell house (which is really quite nice), are often shared between the men and women rowers, although the facilities and equipment are part of the athletic dept. budget.
A few of the insights my daughter provided:
As an athlete, she got priority registration. This makes sense, because classes have to be arranged around practice times. She was rather shocked to find out how difficult it was to get the classes she wanted when she transferred to the U.W.
Each quarter the scholarship athletes would go into a room and pick up their class schedules and a bag of books for the courses, and sign their names. It can’t get much easier. My daughter complained that it took her all day to get her books at the bookstore like all the other students.
Testing was under the control of the athletic department. Since tests have their own schedule, and it can’t conflict with practice times, the professer sends the test over to the athletic dept. to administer the tests. Cheating was rather rampant, as the test monitors would pass out the tests and then leave the room.
Each athlete was assigned an academic advisor from the athletic department. There were mandatory study times at the athletic dept. for freshmen, and tutors were provided readily for any subject.
As for the football team and it’s coaches salaries, I think they should be largely paid for by the NFL. The colleges are merely a farm club system for the NFL anyway.
@53
Now, that’s starting to make more sense. Thanks.
Sorry, but many of these are special admits and would not get in otherwise. If anything they block others from being admitted.
Actually UW is a fairly selective school.
ALL students cost money, there is no profit per student. Athleted cost more than others because they get support others do not get in the way of tutors, oversight, etc. Plus there is an all too serious issue of recism.
BS on your last. The rules against that here are VERY strict.
WA state has a small AA population yet the majority of AA kids here are athletes, Rge message to AA kids is clear.
No, I am not for quotas in any form, I just think our first priority should be to educate Washington kids!
By your reasoning the UW would be utterly corrupt just by hiding more in its private foundations. I do not think many WA citizens would like the idea of privatizing the UW (though it has been discussed).
Again, your second point is utter nonsense. If anything this place is rather conservative and tghewre are no funds to indoctrinate anyone in anything like far right or left ideology. You seem utterly iggorant of what we do here.
a. it is NOT self sustaining since it is an outside funding activity that does not pay indirect costs.
b. I do not consider varsity football played by WA state kids a minor sport.
6. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the athletic department seems to do well at graduating student-athletes. The UW has the second-highest rate of any public university on the West Coast.
WSU? In an “academic” conference? I thought we were having a serious discussion. Stanford already is in the conference and the Zags are fine with me. UVA, UNC et al would make for difficult travel. Remember, though, that the UW is a public university. The fact that it is already academically competitive with private schools is nothing to scoff at.
As for your sixth point, I picked those campuses to point out that by being in a conference with lower athletic standards, the Dub could have an impressive athletic program AND do a better job of serving WA state kids. There are many excellent academic campuses within our travel range who do not try to compete for the Rose Bowl.
WSU is a very good school, competitive with the UW academically, in some areas better.
The grad rate is deceptive. Graduating is one thing, another thing is being fed a diploma. We had a terrible meeting with the ADS where they had no useful data on whether their kids were actually learning useful things or just graduating. OBVIOUSLY many majors are closed to these kids because they do not have the time to study!
Since this thread is running off soon, you may find it easier to respond over at SJ.
May I suggest you try to answer the quesitons I asked?
1. does the program serve WA state kids needs?
2. does it improve the central functions of the UW as an academic and intellectual center?
3. As a conservative, do you think it is appropriate for the govmint to run an entertainment industry? Would you like to see WA state run more such entertainments? If so, should they by run by the Education instititions or do we need a new Dept of games?
A few final things:
Remember, the Tyees are paying for Sarkisian, which is why he’ll make more than Gov. Gregoire. And she’ll likely still be in office when the Tyees pull the rug out from under him like they did to Willingham, i.e. he’ll likely never finish his original contract with UW.
Which got me to wondering. IIRC, Mike Belotti down at Oregon is the longest-tenured coach in the PAC-10. I wonder how many coaches have come and gone in the conference since he was hired? Hell, now I’ve got a really good one to ponder out: How many coaches have come and gone in 1-A ball since Joe Paterno was hired at Penn State back in what, 1830?
Word on UW campus is to expect 20% cuts. This is after 4+ decades of this state not fully paying for its world-class university.
All you Husky fans who will defend the athletic program to the death are going to wind up with a football team that no longer has a university to play for.
Not even your precious football players will be able to get into classes they need because of the cutbacks and layoffs.
Athletics pays for nothing on the academic side. It just gives you a thrill without having to pay for what it stands for.
Reexamine your priorities fer cry-eye.
“Husky Dude”* @ 61
“Athletics pays for nothing on the academic side. It just gives you a thrill without having to pay for what it stands for.”
As has been mentioned above, the athletic department contributes millions to the academic side. For one, they PAY for 600+ scholarships that might otherwise have to be funded through tax dollars or the UW waiving those students’ costs here or there. Two, they pay a couple million dollars a year in “institutional overhead.” Not sure exactly what that consists of, but it is categorized as a “non-operational expense” in the NCAA documents.
* – Since you seem to dislike the UW athletic department and the Husky mascot is tied to said department, one must presume that your “Husky Dude” name simply means that you shop in men’s big-n-tall stores.
@62 TRM
HORSETURDS …
1. the scholarships you talk about would not be wanted if it were not for the pro sports effort. Many, perhaps most of the kids who det into UW on ath scholarships need to be exemoted from the UW’s normal admissions standards.
2. A “couple of million” is VERY little and no where near the cost to the UW. The rule fo thumb across the nation is that 75% of a programs costs need to go to overhead .. that is 75% above the costs. This pays for heat, light, cops, libraries, administrative costs, the President, the Provost, rent, grounds, fees paid in lieu of taxes, etc. The G coach salary alone implies an overhead of 1 million dollars. You want to bet that it is not being paid?
Why don’t you answer my questions in item 59?
Thanks, Seattle Jew.
Mark- don’t hide behind insults: Why will you defend UW sports to the end, but you won’t support UW education? If all that’s being supported is the athletics, what’s left on north campus?
There’ll be 20% cuts. Not even your precious athletes will be able to get into their classes with those kind of cuts.
And why can’t I be a Husky if I question the emphasis on athletics over education? Is that all being a Husky means to you?
What kind of Husky fan are you?!