On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:09:06 -0000 (UTC), rkshullat@rosettacondot.com
wrote:

>Johnny1A <johnny1a.again@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 11:47:02 PM UTC-6, Robert Woodward wrote:
>>> In article <adi3shlg7fnorcpda...@4ax.com>,
>>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 08:52:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich
>>> > <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >>>>Per-pupil annual expenditures: New York, $24K; Idaho, $8K. Although
>>> > >>>>a rising tide lifts all boats, either Idaho children are still being
>>> > >>>>short-changed or New York is wasting its money.
>>> >
>>> > Or they're simply paying their teachers more....no need to assume that
>>> > means a superior education.
>>> I suspect that they are paying their administrators more. I don't know
>>> if it is currently true*, but I remember reading some decades ago that
>>> one half of the entire budget for the New York City public school system
>>> stayed in the central administration building.
>>
>> This is _common_.
>>
>>
>> It's true at all levels, too. Take a look at college campuses across the country. Over the last thirty years, colleges ranging from major universities to local community colleges have spent huge sums...but much of it has gone to things like new stadia, new fancy buildings, new decorative architecture. The university I attended is no exception, I revisited the campus not long ago and there are fancy new fountains, lots of very pretty facades and so forth, and a _huge_ new football stadium to replace the old one that had been there for decades and served well.
>
>There are a number of different reasons for this.
>Donors usually like to have their money go to something that people can see.
>If it can have a plaque put on it even better. Also, "John Smith Memorial
>Library" sounds much more impressive than "John Smith Memorial Bathroom
>Maintenance Fund". Except for endowed chairs and scholarships it also tends to
>be easier to get a large one-shot donation than an ongoing commitment.
>For non-donation funding, in the case of public schools there are convoluted
>rules and laws about what different income sources can be used for. One of the
>more common is that bonds can be used for new construction or major
>improvements, not for ongoing maintenance or general expenditures. Likewise
>with certain fees. Many years ago we had a "computer lab fee" associated with
>enrollment in Engineering College courses. Lab fees could only be used for
>consumables, not for salaries or capital expenditures. After some discussion
>it was decided that we could declare the student employees as consumables
>since there was no long-term commitment.
>Sports is a special case...the university I was at ran the sports program as
>as a separate entity (I suspect primarily to avoid salary limits for state
>employees). The football program pretty much funded the rest of the sports
>programs, with typically a few million a year left over.

That's the story at the university I attended as well. It's pretty
effective at attacks on how wasteful a sports program is. Who cares
how unneccessary the new stadium is when the Sports program pays for
it all by itself? They have to do /something/ with the money they rake
in, after all.

Also, a lot of Alumni (especially rich Alumni) remember only one thing
from their College Days with great pride -- their football team.
Making it easier to raise money from Alumni for sports than for
anything else.

Myself, I've always felt they could just move the sports program,
facilities and all, to Tukwila and let the players' mules continue to
take their courses for them. I may, of course, be slightly biased by
the enormous amount of traffic Game Days generate, making it hard for
mere pedestrians to move about.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

In article <mnagsh52lbnh0n9qen7t9pvioi031rdsuu@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>Also, a lot of Alumni (especially rich Alumni) remember only one thing
>from their College Days with great pride -- their football team.
>Making it easier to raise money from Alumni for sports than for
>anything else.

A curse from which UWaterloo students are often mercifully spared.
There were students in the 1980s who acquired their degrees without
ever suffering a Waterloo Warrior win. More recently, the uni had
a steroid scandal in which it was apparent the use of performance
enhancing drugs failed to enhance performance.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 12:29:17 PM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:09:06 -0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> wrote:
> >Johnny1A <johnny1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 11:47:02 PM UTC-6, Robert Woodward wrote:
> >>> In article <adi3shlg7fnorcpda...@4ax.com>,
> >>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 08:52:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich
> >>> > <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > >>>>Per-pupil annual expenditures: New York, $24K; Idaho, $8K. Although
> >>> > >>>>a rising tide lifts all boats, either Idaho children are still being
> >>> > >>>>short-changed or New York is wasting its money.
> >>> >
> >>> > Or they're simply paying their teachers more....no need to assume that
> >>> > means a superior education.
> >>> I suspect that they are paying their administrators more. I don't know
> >>> if it is currently true*, but I remember reading some decades ago that
> >>> one half of the entire budget for the New York City public school system
> >>> stayed in the central administration building.
> >>
> >> This is _common_.
> >>
> >>
> >> It's true at all levels, too. Take a look at college campuses across the country. Over the last thirty years, colleges ranging from major universities to local community colleges have spent huge sums...but much of it has gone to things like new stadia, new fancy buildings, new decorative architecture. The university I attended is no exception, I revisited the campus not long ago and there are fancy new fountains, lots of very pretty facades and so forth, and a _huge_ new football stadium to replace the old one that had been there for decades and served well.
> >
> >There are a number of different reasons for this.
> >Donors usually like to have their money go to something that people can see.
> >If it can have a plaque put on it even better. Also, "John Smith Memorial
> >Library" sounds much more impressive than "John Smith Memorial Bathroom
> >Maintenance Fund". Except for endowed chairs and scholarships it also tends to
> >be easier to get a large one-shot donation than an ongoing commitment.
> >For non-donation funding, in the case of public schools there are convoluted
> >rules and laws about what different income sources can be used for. One of the
> >more common is that bonds can be used for new construction or major
> >improvements, not for ongoing maintenance or general expenditures. Likewise
> >with certain fees. Many years ago we had a "computer lab fee" associated with
> >enrollment in Engineering College courses. Lab fees could only be used for
> >consumables, not for salaries or capital expenditures. After some discussion
> >it was decided that we could declare the student employees as consumables
> >since there was no long-term commitment.
> >Sports is a special case...the university I was at ran the sports program as
> >as a separate entity (I suspect primarily to avoid salary limits for state
> >employees). The football program pretty much funded the rest of the sports
> >programs, with typically a few million a year left over.
> That's the story at the university I attended as well. It's pretty
> effective at attacks on how wasteful a sports program is.

Only if you don't look at the details. At various schools the accounting that
shows the sports program paying for itself is rather suspect. An income
stream which would exist with or without sports gets assigned to sports.
As long as it isn't tuition you can get away with this.

I worked at Dalhousie university for some years. They had one football game per
year, complete with cheers, but without football teams. Dalhousie always won
with a TD in the last minute. Never a dull game.

William Hyde

On 1/18/2023 9:29 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:09:06 -0000 (UTC), rkshullat@rosettacondot.com
> wrote:
>
>> Johnny1A <johnny1a.again@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 11:47:02 PM UTC-6, Robert Woodward wrote:
>>>> In article <adi3shlg7fnorcpda...@4ax.com>,
>>>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 08:52:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich
>>>>> <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Per-pupil annual expenditures: New York, $24K; Idaho, $8K. Although
>>>>>>>>> a rising tide lifts all boats, either Idaho children are still being
>>>>>>>>> short-changed or New York is wasting its money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or they're simply paying their teachers more....no need to assume that
>>>>> means a superior education.
>>>> I suspect that they are paying their administrators more. I don't know
>>>> if it is currently true*, but I remember reading some decades ago that
>>>> one half of the entire budget for the New York City public school system
>>>> stayed in the central administration building.
>>>
>>> This is _common_.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's true at all levels, too. Take a look at college campuses across the country. Over the last thirty years, colleges ranging from major universities to local community colleges have spent huge sums...but much of it has gone to things like new stadia, new fancy buildings, new decorative architecture. The university I attended is no exception, I revisited the campus not long ago and there are fancy new fountains, lots of very pretty facades and so forth, and a _huge_ new football stadium to replace the old one that had been there for decades and served well.
>>
>> There are a number of different reasons for this.
>> Donors usually like to have their money go to something that people can see.
>> If it can have a plaque put on it even better. Also, "John Smith Memorial
>> Library" sounds much more impressive than "John Smith Memorial Bathroom
>> Maintenance Fund". Except for endowed chairs and scholarships it also tends to
>> be easier to get a large one-shot donation than an ongoing commitment.
>> For non-donation funding, in the case of public schools there are convoluted
>> rules and laws about what different income sources can be used for. One of the
>> more common is that bonds can be used for new construction or major
>> improvements, not for ongoing maintenance or general expenditures. Likewise
>> with certain fees. Many years ago we had a "computer lab fee" associated with
>> enrollment in Engineering College courses. Lab fees could only be used for
>> consumables, not for salaries or capital expenditures. After some discussion
>> it was decided that we could declare the student employees as consumables
>> since there was no long-term commitment.
>> Sports is a special case...the university I was at ran the sports program as
>> as a separate entity (I suspect primarily to avoid salary limits for state
>> employees). The football program pretty much funded the rest of the sports
>> programs, with typically a few million a year left over.
>
> That's the story at the university I attended as well. It's pretty
> effective at attacks on how wasteful a sports program is. Who cares
> how unneccessary the new stadium is when the Sports program pays for
> it all by itself? They have to do /something/ with the money they rake
> in, after all.
>
And using it to pay for classes, teachers and non-sport scholarships is
right out!

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

In article <mnagsh52lbnh0n9qen7t9pvioi031rdsuu@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:09:06 -0000 (UTC), rkshullat@rosettacondot.com
> wrote:
>

<SNIP!>

> >Sports is a special case...the university I was at ran the sports program as
> >as a separate entity (I suspect primarily to avoid salary limits for state
> >employees). The football program pretty much funded the rest of the sports
> >programs, with typically a few million a year left over.
>
> That's the story at the university I attended as well. It's pretty
> effective at attacks on how wasteful a sports program is. Who cares
> how unneccessary the new stadium is when the Sports program pays for
> it all by itself? They have to do /something/ with the money they rake
> in, after all.
>
> Also, a lot of Alumni (especially rich Alumni) remember only one thing
> from their College Days with great pride -- their football team.
> Making it easier to raise money from Alumni for sports than for
> anything else.

The University that I am an Alumni of (as were both of my parents)
doesn't have enough seats in its stadium (100 thousand is far from being
sufficient). The alumni have to donate money ($500+?) to the university
fund (not the athletic department) just to be able to buy two tickets to
one random home game each year. Big donors can buy season tickets.

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 2:43:12 PM UTC-6, William Hyde wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 12:29:17 PM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:09:06 -0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> > wrote:
> > >Johnny1A <johnny1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 11:47:02 PM UTC-6, Robert Woodward wrote:
> > >>> In article <adi3shlg7fnorcpda...@4ax.com>,
> > >>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 08:52:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich
> > >>> > <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > >>>>Per-pupil annual expenditures: New York, $24K; Idaho, $8K. Although
> > >>> > >>>>a rising tide lifts all boats, either Idaho children are still being
> > >>> > >>>>short-changed or New York is wasting its money.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Or they're simply paying their teachers more....no need to assume that
> > >>> > means a superior education.
> > >>> I suspect that they are paying their administrators more. I don't know
> > >>> if it is currently true*, but I remember reading some decades ago that
> > >>> one half of the entire budget for the New York City public school system
> > >>> stayed in the central administration building.
> > >>
> > >> This is _common_.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> It's true at all levels, too. Take a look at college campuses across the country. Over the last thirty years, colleges ranging from major universities to local community colleges have spent huge sums...but much of it has gone to things like new stadia, new fancy buildings, new decorative architecture. The university I attended is no exception, I revisited the campus not long ago and there are fancy new fountains, lots of very pretty facades and so forth, and a _huge_ new football stadium to replace the old one that had been there for decades and served well.
> > >
> > >There are a number of different reasons for this.
> > >Donors usually like to have their money go to something that people can see.
> > >If it can have a plaque put on it even better. Also, "John Smith Memorial
> > >Library" sounds much more impressive than "John Smith Memorial Bathroom
> > >Maintenance Fund". Except for endowed chairs and scholarships it also tends to
> > >be easier to get a large one-shot donation than an ongoing commitment.
> > >For non-donation funding, in the case of public schools there are convoluted
> > >rules and laws about what different income sources can be used for. One of the
> > >more common is that bonds can be used for new construction or major
> > >improvements, not for ongoing maintenance or general expenditures. Likewise
> > >with certain fees. Many years ago we had a "computer lab fee" associated with
> > >enrollment in Engineering College courses. Lab fees could only be used for
> > >consumables, not for salaries or capital expenditures. After some discussion
> > >it was decided that we could declare the student employees as consumables
> > >since there was no long-term commitment.
> > >Sports is a special case...the university I was at ran the sports program as
> > >as a separate entity (I suspect primarily to avoid salary limits for state
> > >employees). The football program pretty much funded the rest of the sports
> > >programs, with typically a few million a year left over.
> > That's the story at the university I attended as well. It's pretty
> > effective at attacks on how wasteful a sports program is.
> Only if you don't look at the details. At various schools the accounting that
> shows the sports program paying for itself is rather suspect. An income
> stream which would exist with or without sports gets assigned to sports.
> As long as it isn't tuition you can get away with this.

> William Hyde

I can easily believe this happens in many places.

There's something about the role of sports in academic environments that is....well, obsessive comes to mind in many instances. I grant that some sports, esp. football, can be genuinely profitable, at least sometimes, but even so, rationally speaking academics are supposed to be the reason for the existence of academic institutions.

It's not just colleges, either. High schools, at least in the USA, can be as bad (or worse relative to their size, student body, and budget) as the colleges. Math, science, history, geography, civics, never minds those distractions, the team is in line for the regional championship! Sometimes it gets so bad that the local cops will even let the quarterback or other players off for minor offenses, just because he's the teams needs them. Granted this last is exceptional, but it does happen.

And of course it's a cliche (because it's true) that absolutely nobody will care that you scored the winning touchdown 5 years after you graduate.

On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 22:01:47 -0800, Robert Woodward
<robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

>In article <mnagsh52lbnh0n9qen7t9pvioi031rdsuu@4ax.com>,
> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Also, a lot of Alumni (especially rich Alumni) remember only one thing
>> from their College Days with great pride -- their football team.
>> Making it easier to raise money from Alumni for sports than for
>> anything else.

I went to Penn State and while there I think I went to one, possibly
two football games. Just had zero interest (and they even won a
national championship while I was there). For me, Saturday afternoons
were laundry time, because everyone else was at the game so I knew the
building's washers and dryers would be available.

But after I graduated, watching Penn State football games on TV was
pretty much the only way for me to maintain a nostalgic connection to
my college years. So I've gotten in the habit of watching all their
games.

>The University that I am an Alumni of (as were both of my parents)
>doesn't have enough seats in its stadium (100 thousand is far from being
>sufficient). The alumni have to donate money ($500+?) to the university
>fund (not the athletic department) just to be able to buy two tickets to
>one random home game each year. Big donors can buy season tickets.

That sounds pretty similar to the PSU system. I don't know the
details because I don't buy tickets (would much rather watch the games
on TV), but my dad used to donate a lot of money to the school in
order to get football tickets. He didn't go to school there, but both
his sons did.

-- Bob

On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 1:46:10 AM UTC-5, Johnny1A wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 2:43:12 PM UTC-6, William Hyde wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 12:29:17 PM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
> > > On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:09:06 -0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >Johnny1A <johnny1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 11:47:02 PM UTC-6, Robert Woodward wrote:
> > > >>> In article <adi3shlg7fnorcpda...@4ax.com>,
> > > >>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 08:52:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich
> > > >>> > <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > >>>>Per-pupil annual expenditures: New York, $24K; Idaho, $8K. Although
> > > >>> > >>>>a rising tide lifts all boats, either Idaho children are still being
> > > >>> > >>>>short-changed or New York is wasting its money.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Or they're simply paying their teachers more....no need to assume that
> > > >>> > means a superior education.
> > > >>> I suspect that they are paying their administrators more. I don't know
> > > >>> if it is currently true*, but I remember reading some decades ago that
> > > >>> one half of the entire budget for the New York City public school system
> > > >>> stayed in the central administration building.
> > > >>
> > > >> This is _common_.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> It's true at all levels, too. Take a look at college campuses across the country. Over the last thirty years, colleges ranging from major universities to local community colleges have spent huge sums...but much of it has gone to things like new stadia, new fancy buildings, new decorative architecture. The university I attended is no exception, I revisited the campus not long ago and there are fancy new fountains, lots of very pretty facades and so forth, and a _huge_ new football stadium to replace the old one that had been there for decades and served well.
> > > >
> > > >There are a number of different reasons for this.
> > > >Donors usually like to have their money go to something that people can see.
> > > >If it can have a plaque put on it even better. Also, "John Smith Memorial
> > > >Library" sounds much more impressive than "John Smith Memorial Bathroom
> > > >Maintenance Fund". Except for endowed chairs and scholarships it also tends to
> > > >be easier to get a large one-shot donation than an ongoing commitment.
> > > >For non-donation funding, in the case of public schools there are convoluted
> > > >rules and laws about what different income sources can be used for. One of the
> > > >more common is that bonds can be used for new construction or major
> > > >improvements, not for ongoing maintenance or general expenditures. Likewise
> > > >with certain fees. Many years ago we had a "computer lab fee" associated with
> > > >enrollment in Engineering College courses. Lab fees could only be used for
> > > >consumables, not for salaries or capital expenditures. After some discussion
> > > >it was decided that we could declare the student employees as consumables
> > > >since there was no long-term commitment.
> > > >Sports is a special case...the university I was at ran the sports program as
> > > >as a separate entity (I suspect primarily to avoid salary limits for state
> > > >employees). The football program pretty much funded the rest of the sports
> > > >programs, with typically a few million a year left over.
> > > That's the story at the university I attended as well. It's pretty
> > > effective at attacks on how wasteful a sports program is.
> > Only if you don't look at the details. At various schools the accounting that
> > shows the sports program paying for itself is rather suspect. An income
> > stream which would exist with or without sports gets assigned to sports..
> > As long as it isn't tuition you can get away with this.
> > William Hyde
>
> I can easily believe this happens in many places.
>
> There's something about the role of sports in academic environments that is...well, obsessive comes to mind in many instances. I grant that some sports, esp. football, can be genuinely profitable, at least sometimes, but even so, rationally speaking academics are supposed to be the reason for the existence of academic institutions.

Things can get crazy even outside academic sports. I once bought some shares in a profitable beer company, which then went and bought
a major league baseball team. The advertising benefits may have been there, though I didn't see any surge in sales myself, but the team
itself only made money if they reached the playoffs. Even then it was a profit of a couple of million on a team officially worth 250 million.

They were contemplating buying the NY rangers, and I was contemplating selling, when someone made them an offer for the baseball
team and they took it. Sigh of relief on my part.

William Hyde

On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 22:46:07 -0800 (PST), Johnny1A
<johnny1a.again@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 2:43:12 PM UTC-6, William Hyde wrote:
>> On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 12:29:17 PM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
>> > On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 22:09:06 -0000 (UTC), rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>> > wrote:
>> > >Johnny1A <johnny1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 11:47:02 PM UTC-6, Robert Woodward wrote:
>> > >>> In article <adi3shlg7fnorcpda...@4ax.com>,
>> > >>> The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 08:52:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich
>> > >>> > <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > >>>>Per-pupil annual expenditures: New York, $24K; Idaho, $8K. Although
>> > >>> > >>>>a rising tide lifts all boats, either Idaho children are still being
>> > >>> > >>>>short-changed or New York is wasting its money.
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > Or they're simply paying their teachers more....no need to assume that
>> > >>> > means a superior education.
>> > >>> I suspect that they are paying their administrators more. I don't know
>> > >>> if it is currently true*, but I remember reading some decades ago that
>> > >>> one half of the entire budget for the New York City public school system
>> > >>> stayed in the central administration building.
>> > >>
>> > >> This is _common_.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> It's true at all levels, too. Take a look at college campuses across the country. Over the last thirty years, colleges ranging from major universities to local community colleges have spent huge sums...but much of it has gone to things like new stadia, new fancy buildings, new decorative architecture. The university I attended is no exception, I revisited the campus not long ago and there are fancy new fountains, lots of very pretty facades and so forth, and a _huge_ new football stadium to replace the old one that had been there for decades and served well.
>> > >
>> > >There are a number of different reasons for this.
>> > >Donors usually like to have their money go to something that people can see.
>> > >If it can have a plaque put on it even better. Also, "John Smith Memorial
>> > >Library" sounds much more impressive than "John Smith Memorial Bathroom
>> > >Maintenance Fund". Except for endowed chairs and scholarships it also tends to
>> > >be easier to get a large one-shot donation than an ongoing commitment.
>> > >For non-donation funding, in the case of public schools there are convoluted
>> > >rules and laws about what different income sources can be used for. One of the
>> > >more common is that bonds can be used for new construction or major
>> > >improvements, not for ongoing maintenance or general expenditures. Likewise
>> > >with certain fees. Many years ago we had a "computer lab fee" associated with
>> > >enrollment in Engineering College courses. Lab fees could only be used for
>> > >consumables, not for salaries or capital expenditures. After some discussion
>> > >it was decided that we could declare the student employees as consumables
>> > >since there was no long-term commitment.
>> > >Sports is a special case...the university I was at ran the sports program as
>> > >as a separate entity (I suspect primarily to avoid salary limits for state
>> > >employees). The football program pretty much funded the rest of the sports
>> > >programs, with typically a few million a year left over.
>> > That's the story at the university I attended as well. It's pretty
>> > effective at attacks on how wasteful a sports program is.
>> Only if you don't look at the details. At various schools the accounting that
>> shows the sports program paying for itself is rather suspect. An income
>> stream which would exist with or without sports gets assigned to sports.
>> As long as it isn't tuition you can get away with this.
>
>> William Hyde
>
>I can easily believe this happens in many places.
>
>There's something about the role of sports in academic environments that is...well, obsessive comes to mind in many instances. I grant that some sports, esp. football, can be genuinely profitable, at least sometimes, but even so, rationally speaking academics are supposed to be the reason for the existence of academic institutions.
>
>It's not just colleges, either. High schools, at least in the USA, can be as bad (or worse relative to their size, student body, and budget) as the colleges. Math, science, history, geography, civics, never minds those distractions, the team is in line for the regional championship! Sometimes it gets so bad that the local cops will even let the quarterback or other players off for minor offenses, just because he's the teams needs them. Granted this last is exceptional, but it does happen.
>
>And of course it's a cliche (because it's true) that absolutely nobody will care that you scored the winning touchdown 5 years after you graduate.

There is, of course, a /long/ tradition when we remember that the
original colonies were /British/ and that "games" have long been a
part of a proper British education.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

In article <4c17ffe4-8fb1-4881-9fac-bdb68c0a88f6n@googlegroups.com>,
Johnny1A <johnny1a.again@gmail.com> wrote:
>There's something about the role of sports in academic environments that
>is...well, obsessive comes to mind in many instances. I grant that some
>sports, esp. football, can be genuinely profitable, at least sometimes,
>but even so, rationally speaking academics are supposed to be the reason
>for the existence of academic institutions.

(Hal Heydt)
It was a standing joke when I was a student at UC Berkeley in the
late 1960s that Cal would have a great football team...as soon as
someone figured out how to puts cleats on sandals.

>It's not just colleges, either. High schools, at least in the USA, can
>be as bad (or worse relative to their size, student body, and budget) as
>the colleges. Math, science, history, geography, civics, never minds
>those distractions, the team is in line for the regional championship!
>Sometimes it gets so bad that the local cops will even let the
>quarterback or other players off for minor offenses, just because he's
>the teams needs them. Granted this last is exceptional, but it does
>happen.

The high school I graduated from (my family moved in the middle
of my sophmore year, so it wasn't the high I started out at) made
the major mistake of winning the local football championship in
their first year of existence.

While I was there, football rallies had *mandatory* attendance. I
believe Dorothy described what happened in my senior year there
with a good supply of books to read. I understand that a year
or two later, they gave to option of going to the school library
instead. Oh, please, don't throw me in *that* briar patch!