Huggins

[TheLivingLegend]

Not true.

Bob Huggins, Petrino, Paterno, Kelvin Sampson, Tressel, Bruce Weber to name a few.

Universities make FAR more money on research dollars than athletics. They need a good reputation to generate interest into research memberships.

IF UC gets into the AAU they will have access to more money than any football or basketball program can generate.

It is not all about sports. Look at endowments. Why doesn't Bama, LSU, Arkansas and Oklahoma have the biggest endowments?

Who does? Obviously Harvard, Yale, Princeton etc.

Of non Ivy league schools? It is a lot of Big Ten school and Pac 12 schools.

SEC football money has NOTHING on research dollars. Vandy has the most money of all the SEC schools. THE WORST football playing school. No other SEC school is in the top 50.

Look at the list. Athletics dont do all that much if the grand scheme of univeristies. They serve to educate, innovate and inspire change to communities.

People look at universities as pro athletics for some reason. It isn't and school administrators dont treat it as such.

If this argument had any truth to it, all schools would have all 4.0 athletes and only recruit such.

 

[UCalum08]

I couldn't be happier with Cronin, its easy being a proud uc alum with Cronin running the program. He represents the university amazingly and he wins games!

 

[Bearcat22]

Not true.

Bob Huggins, Petrino, Paterno, Kelvin Sampson, Tressel, Bruce Weber to name a few.

Universities make FAR more money on research dollars than athletics. They need a good reputation to generate interest into research memberships.

IF UC gets into the AAU they will have access to more money than any football or basketball program can generate.

It is not all about sports. Look at endowments. Why doesn't Bama, LSU, Arkansas and Oklahoma have the biggest endowments?

Who does? Obviously Harvard, Yale, Princeton etc.

Of non Ivy league schools? It is a lot of Big Ten school and Pac 12 schools.

SEC football money has NOTHING on research dollars. Vandy has the most money of all the SEC schools. THE WORST football playing school. No other SEC school is in the top 50.

Look at the list. Athletics dont do all that much if the grand scheme of univeristies. They serve to educate, innovate and inspire change to communities.

People look at universities as pro athletics for some reason. It isn't and school administrators dont treat it as such.

Sorry if this is a repeat,I tried to post it once before. You can't make an apples to apples comparison with research and athletic dollars. Research dollars are restricted and can only be used for research purposes. The funding only lasts the length of the specific grant or project. None of the funding can be used in the overall university general operating budget. Athletic revenue dollars doesn't carry such restrictions and can be used as needed.

 

[nerf]

However, schools themselves don't make tons and tons of money. That is why they are funded by the state, strive to have large endowments, etc. Their costs are huge.

Every time a research grant comes to any area, the University gets a cut. Next the college gets a cut, then the department gets a cut. It has been a while since I've worked in that area, but at the time, each cut was in the 5%-10% range as I recall.

The State of Ohio funds about 15% of UCs operating budget. None of which goes to athletics btw. So actually, yes the schools do make pretty good money.

 

[Bearcat22]

Every time a research grant comes to any area, the University gets a cut. Next the college gets a cut, then the department gets a cut. It has been a while since I've worked in that area, but at the time, each cut was in the 5%-10% range as I recall.

The State of Ohio funds about 15% of UCs operating budget. None of which goes to athletics btw. So actually, yes the schools do make pretty good money.

The cut from grants that the university can use comes in the form of indirects which the percentage can vary. Those funds are for grant resources and administration. They are heavily restricted in how they can be used and aren't for general non grant purposes.

 

[TheLongHaul]

Every time a research grant comes to any area, the University gets a cut. Next the college gets a cut, then the department gets a cut. It has been a while since I've worked in that area, but at the time, each cut was in the 5%-10% range as I recall.

The State of Ohio funds about 15% of UCs operating budget. None of which goes to athletics btw. So actually, yes the schools do make pretty good money.

if the state schools are making so much money, why are they being funded by tax payers? I understand they generate lots of revenue, but when I hear the terms making money, I think profit, not revenue. If the schools are making money, why aren't they self funded?

 

[nerf]

if the state schools are making so much money, why are they being funded by tax payers? I understand they generate lots of revenue, but when I hear the terms making money, I think profit, not revenue. If the schools are making money, why aren't they self funded?

Every state in this country has some kind of university system, most probably an indirect result of the Morrill land grant acts. If Ohio wants to be the first state to get out of the higher-education business, they can fold the Ohio Board of Regents, and cut entirely the appropriations for Universities. I don't know how that would reflect on the state though.