If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   University of Alabama spends $9 million on a new state-of-the-art A) research facility, B) lecture hall, or C) weight room for the football team   (espn.go.com) divider line 95
    More: Asinine, University of Alabama, Alabama, tides, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, state-of-the-art, Nick Saban, weight trains, junior college  
•       •       •

1361 clicks; posted to Sports » on 02 Mar 2013 at 7:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-02 05:15:31 PM  
If you want a pro football team, you have to have pro football facilities.

The money was raised from outside sources. It isn't like they diverted classroom funds to the Athletic Department. This time.
 
2013-03-02 05:23:21 PM  
The athletic department is fiscally independent from the university for all intents and purposes.
 
2013-03-02 06:09:08 PM  
Meh, I'm still outraged.
 
2013-03-02 06:41:59 PM  

Mentat: The athletic department is fiscally independent from the university for all intents and purposes.


So it's a football team with a university relationship.
 
2013-03-02 07:15:49 PM  
How is a 9 mill weight room even possible.
Color me impressed instead of mad.
 
2013-03-02 07:17:50 PM  
Most Tier 1 college football programs are huge profit centers for the university.  Their revenues support most of the other college sports programs, especially those mandated by Title IX.  Not much of  a revenue stream from women's rowing.  And although I DNRTFA, I suspect the funds came from a grateful alumnus.

So point your phoney educational system angst in another general direction.
 
2013-03-02 07:18:50 PM  

2wolves: Mentat: The athletic department is fiscally independent from the university for all intents and purposes.

So it's a football team with a university relationship.


Yep.  As long as we adhere to the facade of amateurism, that's what you get.
 
2013-03-02 07:34:14 PM  
So , the fact that The Univ of Alabama built a 23 million dollar Research and Development wing and a 19 million Dollar Language institutes wing, that shouldn't get in your way. Go ahead morons.
 
2013-03-02 07:37:24 PM  

Rodeodoc: Most Tier 1 college football programs are huge profit centers for the university.  Their revenues support most of the other college sports programs, especially those mandated by Title IX.  Not much of  a revenue stream from women's rowing.  And although I DNRTFA, I suspect the funds came from a grateful alumnus.

So point your phoney educational system angst in another general direction.


Indeed.  There are a lot of things to get worked up about when it comes to the state of higher education in the United States, but this is not one of them.
 
2013-03-02 07:38:28 PM  

ThisIsntMe: 19 million Dollar Language institutes wing, that shouldn't get in your way. Go ahead morons.


About time the South learned how to speak English.
 
2013-03-02 07:39:59 PM  

poughdrew: ThisIsntMe: 19 million Dollar Language institutes wing, that shouldn't get in your way. Go ahead morons.

About time the South learned how to speak English.


It's actually devoted to the learning of Chinese languages.
 
2013-03-02 07:42:46 PM  
Come on. This isn't even the most heinous thing Alabama has done this week.
 
2013-03-02 07:44:20 PM  
University of Alabama spends $9 million on bailbondsmen

dmnewsi.files.wordpress.com

/ FTFY
 
2013-03-02 07:45:32 PM  
More Kathrine Webb!!
 
2013-03-02 07:46:03 PM  
Hell, I'm surprised it wasn't 90 million.
 
2013-03-02 07:47:13 PM  
I am outraged that a research facility or lecture hall at the University of Alabama didn't make nearly as much money or gain as much attention as the National Championship Football team did.
 
2013-03-02 07:50:30 PM  
Looks like your attempt at creating outrage has failed, irishmitter.
 
2013-03-02 07:51:13 PM  
If submitter is desperate for something to get outraged about, he could try to argue that smaller schools without the alumni base MAY use general school funds to upgrade facilities to try to keep pace with the D-1 facilities arms race... But probably not.

As has been said in this thread several times, major college sports programs are financially independent from their schools.  Academics are free to dream that the money alumni donate to sports would otherwise be donated to education, but we all know the reality.

Most athletic departments end up donating very little direct cash to their schools.  However, success in sports has been proven to increase the number of future applicants to the school, which leads to both higher standards and an increased tuition and donor base.
 
2013-03-02 07:51:34 PM  

Krieghund: If you want a pro football team, you have to have pro football facilities.


These guys are going to be in for a harsh reality check if they get drafted by Oakland.
 
2013-03-02 08:04:46 PM  

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: Most athletic departments end up donating very little direct cash to their schools.  However, success in sports has been proven to increase the number of future applicants to the school, which leads to both higher standards and an increased tuition and donor base.


Citation, please.

Also, cite how the "increased tuition" is a net positive for the school and/or state, financially.

/the donor base comment is accurate
//but a good sports program, or at least the myth of one, can do that by just getting the local uneducated folk on the bandwagon
///see: the University of Oregon
 
2013-03-02 08:05:45 PM  

great_tigers: I am outraged that a research facility or lecture hall at the University of Alabama didn't make nearly as much money or gain as much attention as the National Championship Football team did.


I'm outraged that the professors at the University of Alabama didn't make as much money as the players did on the B(C)S Championship Team.
 
2013-03-02 08:22:48 PM  

ThisIsntMe: poughdrew: ThisIsntMe: 19 million Dollar Language institutes wing, that shouldn't get in your way. Go ahead morons.

About time the South learned how to speak English.

It's actually devoted to the learning of Chinese languages.


Maybe they should start with English first, instead of more complex languages like Chinese.
 
2013-03-02 08:27:50 PM  

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: If submitter is desperate for something to get outraged about, he could try to argue that smaller schools without the alumni base MAY use general school funds to upgrade facilities to try to keep pace with the D-1 facilities arms race... But probably not.

As has been said in this thread several times, major college sports programs are financially independent from their schools.  Academics are free to dream that the money alumni donate to sports would otherwise be donated to education, but we all know the reality.

Most athletic departments end up donating very little direct cash to their schools.  However, success in sports has been proven to increase the number of future applicants to the school, which leads to both higher standards and an increased tuition and donor base.


May? They most certainly do. And not just general funds. Some athletic departments have the weight to pull money from other budgets on campus. I lived it first hand. It kinda sucks when money gets pulled from your budget so they can install new bleachers for basketball games which nobody attends.
 
2013-03-02 08:29:52 PM  

Rodeodoc: Most Tier 1 college football programs are huge profit centers for the university.  Their revenues support most of the other college sports programs, especially those mandated by Title IX.  Not much of  a revenue stream from women's rowing.  And although I DNRTFA, I suspect the funds came from a grateful alumnus.

So point your phoney educational system angst in another general direction.


Only the top 20 or so athletic departments in college sports turn a profit. The Texases and Ohio States and such. Every other one is a money loser.
 
2013-03-02 08:37:16 PM  

puffy999: Citation, please.


Missouri had its highest freshmen enrollments ever in the two years after their 2007 season in which they were ranked #1 and one game away from the National Championship.  Obviously there's a law of marginal returns in effect since schools like Alabama probably don't see such a bump.
 
2013-03-02 08:38:25 PM  

ElwoodCuse: Only the top 20 or so athletic departments in college sports turn a profit. The Texases and Ohio States and such. Every other one is a money loser.


No, not every other one.  Before their move to the SEC, Missouri and Texas were the only profitable AD's in the Big XII.  I believe Kansas State is now also profitable.  Both Mizzou and Kansas State achieved that by being pragmatic with their money.
 
2013-03-02 08:41:43 PM  

Krieghund: If you want a pro football team, you have to have pro football facilities.

The money was raised from outside sources. It isn't like they diverted classroom funds to the Athletic Department. This time.


How much revenue does the football program bring in for the title IX sports?

If it's more than $9 million annually, people need to stuff it.
 
2013-03-02 08:46:54 PM  

Mentat: ElwoodCuse: Only the top 20 or so athletic departments in college sports turn a profit. The Texases and Ohio States and such. Every other one is a money loser.

No, not every other one.  Before their move to the SEC, Missouri and Texas were the only profitable AD's in the Big XII.  I believe Kansas State is now also profitable.  Both Mizzou and Kansas State achieved that by being pragmatic with their money.


I don't know if this is the case for all schools, but I do know that many schools don't include big ticket items like new stadiums in yearly budgets.  I remember seeing numbers from what the University of Minnesota athletic department claimed to spend and bring in, and it never included the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the stadium, which came from a different money source.  I'm sure that Alabama athletics would be profitable no matter how you did the math, but if I had to guess, I'd say that there are maybe 20 ADs in the nation that turn a profit over time if you include everything.

The real problem for me is this:

The public often ends up paying for athletics at schools that don't turn a profit (at state schools anyway).  But as soon as athletic departments make money, its all "hey, we are making money, so we get to spend it on more athletics".  So losses are funded by the public, while gains are mostly kept by athletic departments.  I'm not a big fan of that.

Plus, you have arms races where less successful schools that don't make money on athletics have to spend big to even keep up with the successful schools like Alabama.  Really the top tier of college sports should include about 50 schools, and the rest should be in some other tier that isn't expected to really compete or spend as much, but whatever.

But really, as people have said, the problem is at less successful schools, not the Alabamas of the world.
 
2013-03-02 08:47:25 PM  

ElwoodCuse: Only the top 20 or so athletic departments in college sports turn a profit. The Texases and Ohio States and such. Every other one is a money loser.


Athletic departments or football programs? Without football or in some cases men's basketball would any AD turn a profit or lose even more money?
 
2013-03-02 08:52:09 PM  
ibankcoin.com
 
2013-03-02 08:56:17 PM  

Rodeodoc: Most Tier 1 college football programs are huge profit centers for the university.  Their revenues support most of the other college sports programs, especially those mandated by Title IX.  Not much of  a revenue stream from women's rowing.  And although I DNRTFA, I suspect the funds came from a grateful rich alumnus who values sports over education.



fixed
 
2013-03-02 09:13:31 PM  

Rodeodoc: Most Tier 1 college football programs are huge profit centers for the university.  Their revenues support most of the other college sports programs, especially those mandated by Title IX.  Not much of  a revenue stream from women's rowing.  And although I DNRTFA, I suspect the funds came from a grateful alumnus.


Right and wrong- Most schools are making profits at all but they do use big football programs to generate all the money for the athletics at a school. See here but also the 60 minutes piece back in Nov 2012 which broke it down and found that on 22/125 BCS eligible schools make profit. Thats nearly 1/5th of all schools with "big" football programs. Its not like they are all bringing in the money- most of it just is cover the cost of the normal athletic seasons for all sports.
 
2013-03-02 09:19:58 PM  

Happy Hours: Rodeodoc: Most Tier 1 college football programs are huge profit centers for the university.  Their revenues support most of the other college sports programs, especially those mandated by Title IX.  Not much of  a revenue stream from women's rowing.  And although I DNRTFA, I suspect the funds came from a grateful rich alumnus who values sports over education.



fixed


Rich alumni who value their own entertainment over other peoples education.

/count me in
 
2013-03-02 09:27:57 PM  

CipollinaFan: How is a 9 mill weight room even possible.
Color me impressed instead of mad.


My company outfits gyms & fieldhouses. The specialized weight room flooring alone in that place runs about $500,000. That's just for starters.
 
2013-03-02 09:28:28 PM  
Why does subby hate America?
 
2013-03-02 09:36:46 PM  
Bank Roll Tide?
 
2013-03-02 10:03:08 PM  
I gotta agree with other posters - how the hell do you even spend $9 million on a weight room? Does every player get his own personal jacuzzi and massage therapist?
 
2013-03-02 10:07:10 PM  
Incest?
 
2013-03-02 10:08:05 PM  

rcf1105: I gotta agree with other posters - how the hell do you even spend $9 million on a weight room? Does every player get his own personal jacuzzi and massage therapist?


Or, and mind you I'm just thinking out loud here, you SAY you're building a $9M weight room when in fact it only costs $5M, so you can hide the other $4M for various player salaries, perks, and lavish sex parties.
 
2013-03-02 10:14:44 PM  
It's chump change compared to how much revenue the team brings to the school.
 
2013-03-02 10:18:22 PM  
With the way they are doing that's just peanuts to them.

One thing that I do respect alabama fans, faculty, and students for is that they don't try to be hypocrites in saying they are a university first and football team second.  They know football stirs the drink and everything else related to the university pales in comparison.
 
2013-03-02 10:21:47 PM  

puffy999: cite how the "increased tuition" is a net positive for the school


that's a joke, right

ElwoodCuse: Only the top 20 or so athletic departments in college sports turn a profit.


With the recent giant TV contracts awarded to the SEC, BIG 10, BIG 12, PAC 12, and to a somewhat lesser degree the ACC, that number is turning sharply upwards.
 
2013-03-02 11:17:00 PM  

ThisIsntMe: So , the fact that The Univ of Alabama built a 23 million dollar Research and Development wing and a 19 million Dollar Language institutes wing, that shouldn't get in your way. Go ahead morons.


Isn't that what a university is supposed to be spending funds on?


What's the graduation rate of the revenue positive athletic teams at Alabama?
 
2013-03-02 11:50:49 PM  

BigJake: With the recent giant TV contracts awarded to the SEC, BIG 10, BIG 12, PAC 12, and to a somewhat lesser degree the ACC, that number is turning sharply upwards.


Oh good so maybe once it gets a little further past that one-fifth number they can do something about maybe exploiting the players less
 
2013-03-02 11:51:26 PM  
There's a sign in the new weight room that says "Sweat is just your fat crying."
 
2013-03-03 12:03:34 AM  

2wolves: ThisIsntMe: So , the fact that The Univ of Alabama built a 23 million dollar Research and Development wing and a 19 million Dollar Language institutes wing, that shouldn't get in your way. Go ahead morons.

Isn't that what a university is supposed to be spending funds on?


What's the graduation rate of the revenue positive athletic teams at Alabama?


http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2012/10/25/ncaa-graduatio n- rates-notre-dame-sec-college-football/1656329/

Notre Dame #1, LSU #6, Alabama #7, Florida #8.  That's for football.
 
2013-03-03 12:08:03 AM  

ElwoodCuse: Oh good so maybe once it gets a little further past that one-fifth number they can do something about maybe exploiting the players less


Most of the "exploitation" is by their fellow student-athletes whose entire programs and scholarships wouldn't exist if football profits didn't fuel them

And considering less than 10% of college players will ever play a down of pro ball there's not a whole lot of exploitation going on
 
2013-03-03 12:09:03 AM  
*fewer than
 
2013-03-03 12:15:08 AM  

BigJake: ElwoodCuse: Oh good so maybe once it gets a little further past that one-fifth number they can do something about maybe exploiting the players less

Most of the "exploitation" is by their fellow student-athletes whose entire programs and scholarships wouldn't exist if football profits didn't fuel them

And considering less than 10% of college players will ever play a down of pro ball there's not a whole lot of exploitation going on


What does that have to do with whether or not the college is exploiting them?
 
2013-03-03 12:22:24 AM  
High schools have been doing this for a while, so I can't be that appalled when a college does it.
The culture has some serious issues in its choice of idols and aspirations. What's new?

/At least it's private money... I think?
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report