|By burningman on Wednesday, January 02, 2002 - 11:46 am: Edit|
Notre Dame is apparently paying their new football coach $2.5 million per year. They could have hired three or four Nobel laureates for that kind of money. Does this seem out of whack, or is it just me?
|By George Meany on Wednesday, January 02, 2002 - 01:12 pm: Edit|
It's not just you, B-man. I'm no anthropologist, but there's got to be some ages-old, genetic root cause for people worshiping sports excellence in colleges. I know, I know; Aristotle (or one of those other intellectual Greeks) said, "Physical fitness and mental fitness go hand in hand," but you're right. Where is this money coming from? The general endowment?
I wonder how much Penn State pays Paterno. How much do Bowden and Spurrier make? It's the whole A-Rod baseball-salary syndrome. Maybe these schools view a winning football team as an extension of their strategic admissions marketing plan. Tell that to schools like Swarthmore, Reed, and MIT.
|By Domer97 on Thursday, January 03, 2002 - 02:16 pm: Edit|
You guys are missing the point. Football at ND is a money-maker. They have a $30 million NBC contract, a sold-out stadium, gobs of licensing revenue, etc. If Willingham can keep the revenue flowing and growing, he'll be worth every penny. Plus, every time ND misses going to a bowl, they give up millions in potential cash. If he takes ND to one or two BCS bowls, that alone would pay for his entire contract.
...They could have hired three or four Nobel laureates ... Sure, but how many Nobel winners does it take to beat Nebraska?
|By Dadster on Friday, January 04, 2002 - 09:34 am: Edit|
The weird thing is that this move may actually make sense for Notre Dame. They really do have a lot of revenue that is fully or partially from football, and I'm pretty sure a portion of the bowl revenue goes into academics in the form of scholarship money for non-athletes. Plus, they have the best football graduation rate in the country (100% last year), and their new coach is uniquely qualified (Stanford's academic standards are even higher than ND's) to continue that tradition of excellence.
The problem I see is that it sets a standard that will make other schools pay more - including ones that don't make a lot of money on their football program. Kind of like baseball, where a star player gets a big salary, and pretty soon every .225 infielder is getting almost as much. This could be a real burden for schools with tight finances. Alumni at many schools expect the football team to excel, and aren't unwilling to pressure the school via lobbying and donations. Administrators may feel they have no choice but to hire a 7-figure coach even if the numbers don't support it, and even if the coach isn't anything special.
|By George Meany on Saturday, January 05, 2002 - 09:13 am: Edit|
I wonder if Spurrier could have turned ND around.
|By Dadster on Monday, January 07, 2002 - 06:15 pm: Edit|
Sure, but how many Nobel winners does it take to beat Nebraska
Not very many if Nebraska plays like they did against Miami!
|By Dave Berry on Tuesday, January 08, 2002 - 09:10 am: Edit|
Dadster, it might take a Nobel math laureate to figure out a fair and sensible BCS playoff scheme!
|By April on Tuesday, November 12, 2002 - 09:43 am: Edit|
Schools over look the fact that acedemics are the most important thing. Schools spend so much time on earning money for sports that they don't give enough attention to the real issues surrounding their school...acedemics. The money being given to the coaches and sports teams could be going to underpaid teachers, or acedemic programs like debate or clubs that compete for the school. school officials should start to realize school isn't about sports, it's about education. It's time for schools to wake up and realize that while the sports teams are gaining all the attention, the students there to learn are losing their right to recognition.
|By Jojo on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 12:33 pm: Edit|
If they simply payed coaches less (they don't need that much) and still won games, bringing in revenues, the schools would be able to budget more for academics and academic programs.
|By webb32 on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 09:19 pm: Edit|
Jojo is right, but the coaches contract is not to large of an issue. If he takes his team to the top 4 in the BCS, that 2.5 million a year would all be worth it with the income. It is coaches that are overpayed that have a poor team or do a poor job of coaching that are a problem to schools.
|By Jojo on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 01:01 pm: Edit|
The thing is though, no one NEEDS 2.5 million a year.
|By Seth Starnes on Saturday, November 23, 2002 - 06:25 pm: Edit|
For ND to be paying 2.5 million dollars to a coach to "Make sure his team gets to the play-offs" is ridiculous. That alone is enough money to send a 100 students to their college per year. Those people are the ones who deserve 2.5 million dollars a year. It doesnt seem as important to me that football gets more money than an academic program in college, because that's what tuition pays for. It's that there a tons of brillant people in this world that dont have the opportunity to get that calibur of education, yet they pay one man 2.5 million dollars to coach a sport that he undoubtedly loves. No one asks him to coach for free but that's a little much.
|By webb23 on Monday, November 25, 2002 - 12:52 pm: Edit|
|By Gregon on Tuesday, November 26, 2002 - 10:34 pm: Edit|
Listen, In our country we reward demand. People want good football. Willingham gives them goo d football. Damn good football.
The school has a rich athletic history and its important to them. HYP have strong academic tradition and thats what's important to them. Sure 2.5 million might be extreme for a coach BUT... 1/2 million might be extreme for a laureate PLUS a laureate might want facillites, special hours, etc. Its not a matter of priorities, its a matter of demand, and what alumni, students, the administration, and probably most of the faculty wanted was a good football team and that's what they got. Sure 2.5 million for a good coach MAY seem extreme BUT 1/2 million for a laureate who may stink as a teacher but be a great researcher is just as extreme.
Seth, Princeton has enough money to pay each of its students (just with endowment interest) $101,436 per year. Don't you think that's a bit extreme as well? That money could be used to make education free. They spend their money on laureates and place the rest into interest, ND spends it on coaches and does the same.
The problem is when people criticize football spending is they don't understand that people really really like football.
Academics are only tiny compared with the leviathon which IS college football!!!!
GO IRISH!!! BEAT USC!!!
|By Tonymon12 (Tonymon12) on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 03:05 pm: Edit|
ABC pays the NCAA $550 MILLION dollars to air the BCS Championship games. Your not going to see that type of money for the academic bowl. The "underpaid" Faculity gets paid with the evergrowing tuition costs so don't cry about them. I'm a jock and if you really want to understand why Athletics is the biggest thing in college excluding athletics. Just play for two years in organized football league.
|By Troy on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 03:44 pm: Edit|
You're absolutely right....fire Ty and have a monkey coach the fighting iwish....seriously though, be happy that you go to a solid university with a solid athletic program...Like it was mentioned in other posts, 2.5 mil is chump change compared to the revenue getting pumped into the univeristy by the football program...Heck, I bet if ND had the choice between hiring 10 Nobel laureates or actually having an offense for the football team, they'd pick the offense...and probably pay good money for it too...lol
So let me ask you this question. Would you be happy to have 3 or 4 more Nobel laureates at the university if it meant losing to USC every year? I would be more than happy with more lureates cuz you're going to lose to SC every year anyway...muhahahaha
|By noony on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 04:13 pm: Edit|
|By no football on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 04:50 am: Edit|
Caltech has no football team.
|By banana56441 on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 10:08 pm: Edit|
i think too much time and money goes to the sports and not enough for learning. We need knowedge to get a good lasting job.
|By Cutie911 (Cutie911) on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 06:31 pm: Edit|
the coach is making more money than he's earning for the school b/c if the team does well, ticket prices go up and there's extra cash for academics. oh, and i'm a non-athlete
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.|
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|