(01-25-2018 04:35 PM)McKinney Wrote:  

(01-25-2018 11:56 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One more thing I find interesting--most of the cost of the athletic department is scholarships. My guess ithe charged amount of the scholarship and its actual cost to the school are not the same (Im virtually certain it actually costs the school less than they charge that athletic department). Additionally, I think Its interesting that we dont attack or expect any other program in a school that awards scholarships to make money. How much money does the school band make? Hell, how much money does the school make on academic scholarships handed out? The fact is---they lose money on those programs. They are give aways.

Agreed with you on everything up to this point. My guess is the reason why high level athletics is in the spotlight is because its expenses have grown exponentially.

Alabama's legendary Coach Bear Bryant was paid a total compensation of $450,000 in his final year (1982) or ~$1.2M in 2018 dollars. Today Nick Saban is paid just north of ~$11M, or 10 times what their 6 time national championship winning coach made when adjusted for inflation.

To me this argument is not about whether a program can afford the expense or even whether the program generates value greater than the cost, rather it's about questioning in general the exponential increase in expenditure.

If band directors were the highest paid state employees in nearly every state in the country, I think people would question it in the same way football and basketball programs are being questioned.

Well, at state universities, there is absolutely nothing to prevent the state legislature from capping the maximum compensation in that position. I have to agree that its a little insane that the highest paid state employee in many states is a football coach (its that way in many town/city school districts as well).