per Schefter : Free-agent CB Richard Sherman was booked at 6:08 this am at the Seattle Correctional Facility for “Burglary Domestic Violence”, per King County public records. Sherman also was denied bail.
per Schefter : Free-agent CB Richard Sherman was booked at 6:08 this am at the Seattle Correctional Facility for “Burglary Domestic Violence”, per King County public records. Sherman also was denied bail.
Kenny Pickett is who I though he was .. Eagles problem now
one year vet minimum
He’s innocent, the police were racist. This never would have happened to Steve Largent. Defund
And to think that someone who would make the most of the opportunity to attend elite educational institution is deprived of that because some random dude can play a game.
Послато са Redmi Note 9 Pro помоћу Тапатока
this adds a ton more insight to the ordeal ...
https://www.nfl.com/news/richard-she...ge-denied-bail
Kenny Pickett is who I though he was .. Eagles problem now
Sherman was the salutatorian for his graduating class in high school (which means he would have gotten into Stanford based on his academics). But, yea… sure.Originally Posted by Drazo85
You can say what you want about Sherman but stupid isn't one of them.
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
Yeah people should really check their facts before they post such statements.
That's hard work, about 90% of people would stop posting entirely
Okay I made a mistake. I have been posting here for quite some time. I never once was rude or disrespectful to anybody. Maybe once I sounded like that recently when I was trying to make a moot point about DeCastro's release and that's all. I acknowledged my mistake and moved on. My point here was that athletes take place of other children and blew their chances like Antonio Browns of the world. I jumped to conclusion regarding Richard Sherman and obviously made a mistake. But that doesn't make me ignorant, as you and others have implied through your posts. Everyone makes mistakes. I have come here to own my. Thank you and wishing for more good conversations in the future.
Послато са Redmi Note 9 Pro помоћу Тапатока
Of course that is unquestionably true and it costs many of our children a lesser education than they might have had.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...588-story.html
SPORTS WITH NO CLASS
Phil Hersh
CHICAGO TRIBUNE April 2 1989
.................................................. .....snip......................................... .....
These are the young men who play for the greater glory of old alma mater, while the institution plays the charade that their presence on campus has something to do with its fundamental mission, which presumably is education. The universities call these young men scholar-athletes, which is such a lie in most cases that the very term scholar-athlete has become the best example to explain the word oxymoron.
In living that lie, many universities have become schools for scandal, tolerating abuses of moral standards and then acting surprised when they lead to worse, as more and more college athletes are identified by the numbers on both game jerseys and prison uniforms.
''The system went sour a long time ago and is only getting more bilious and more corrupt,'' says A. Bartlett Giamatti, commissioner of baseball and former president of Yale University. ''As soon as you pay some students (with an athletic scholarship) to perform an undergraduate extracurricular activity for the revenue purposes of the institution, you have corrupted a set of academic and educational values of the highest order. So it is not surprising to me that all the other abuses follow, as the night the day.''
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
We all make mistakes. And yes they do in general take some places. But consider that the college is making hundreds of millions of dollars off said athletes from gate and tv revenue. How many students does that allow to get a better education?
Are we sure?
Do Colleges Make Money From Athletics?
.......................................snip....... .........................
Among those reporting a net positive, the median profit per school was $7.9 million. And among the 40 autonomy schools reporting a negative net revenue, the median loss was $15.9 million. In other words, the majority of universities in the nation's top athletic conferences — the schools you see on TV every weekend competing for national championships — lost money through their sports programs to the tune of approximately $16 million each.The majority of universities in the nation’s top athletic conferences lost money through their sports programs to the tune of approximately $16 million each.It's worse for Division I non-autonomy schools, or those outside the Power Five conferences. All 64 of these institutions lost money in 2019, with a median deficit of $23 million per school.
Also included in the NCAA's Division I classification are Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) schools, the former I-AA programs that compete in a year-end tournament to determine the national champion. The Power Five and other top conferences are classified as Football Bowl Subdivision schools, which compete at the season's end through a series of bowl games culminating in a four-team playoff to determine the champion.
Of the 125 FCS schools, all reported a negative net generated revenue in 2019, with a median loss of $14.3 million per institution.
Finally, Division I includes 97 schools without football programs. All of them had a negative net revenue in 2019, with a median loss of $14.4 million. And not one college in the NCAA's Division II or III saw their revenues exceed expenses that year.
In total, then, only 25 of the approximately 1,100 schools across 102 conferences in the NCAA made money on college sports last year. That's because the cost of running an entire athletics program, which can feature as many as 40 sports, almost always exceeds the revenue generated by the marquee attractions of football and basketball.
https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/do...ts-make-money/
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
Yes I’m sure. I don’t know who ‘we’ is though. “Sports programs” is not D1 major college football.
"Most public universities lose money on their athletic programs"
https://www.ibtimes.com/college-foot...chance-2258669College Football: Public Universities Spend Millions On Stadiums, Despite Slim Chance For Payoff
Andrew Perez01/11/16 AT 10:11 AM
A view of Bryant-Denny Stadium during the game between the Alabama Crimson Tide and the Tennessee Volunteers on October 24, 2015 in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Photo: Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images When Americans tune into Monday night’s national championship game, they will be watching two public universities whose football programs are the envy of hundreds of other schools — and not just for their on-field achievements. Clemson’s program generates a healthy revenue surplus for the South Carolina school, which is now investing in a new athletic village replete with laser tag and mini golf to attract recruits. The University of Alabama has one of the most lucrative athletic enterprises in sports, generating more money than anyprofessional hockey team.
These apparent success stories — in two of America’s poorest states — would seem to suggest that public universities’ escalating spending on college football programs and stadiums is a shrewd investment, especially at a time when state legislatures are reducing their taxpayer support for higher education. And there are others: The football team of the University of Texas at Austin, for example — which has spent $176 million on stadium upgrades in the last decade — generates the most revenue in the nation. Texas A&M’s football program — which recently benefited from a $450 million stadium upgrade — also ranked among the top 20 schools in revenue.
But those schools are exceptions. Most public universities losemoney on their athletic programs — and many have been running up ever-bigger debt to finance stadiums. The trend has occurred even though there is little evidence that football provides major revenue for expanding academic programs or reducing skyrocketing tuition. Instead, as college football has become a multibillion-dollar business demanding state-of-the-art facilities and massive coaching salaries, it is taxpayers and already debt-burdened students who ultimately pay the bill.
https://college.lovetoknow.com/campu...all-make-moneyDose College Football Make Money?
...................................snip........... .............
Money-Making Myth
According to the American Council on Education (ACE), the notion that college sports makes money is a myth. Even where football does turn a profit, that money often goes to cover expenses associated with other sports. According to the Texas Tribune, "a successful football team can prop up an entire athletic department." However, more often than not, college athletics programs are not fully self-supporting, even with football money. In a 2014 news release, the NCAA indicated athletic department expenses exceeded revenue in all but 20 Football Bowl Subdivision (Division I) schools and in all Division II and III schools.
Self-Sustaining College Athletic Programs
In 2012, ACE indicated only eight public university athletic programs either covered their expenses (across all athletic programs; not just football) or broke even. These eight schools, that ACE describes as an "elite fraternity," are members of the Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC. They are:
- Louisiana State University (LSU)
- Pennsylvania State University (Penn State)
- University of Georgia
- University of Iowa
- University of Michigan
- University of Nebraska
- University of Oklahoma
- University of Texas
At these schools, athletic programs brought in enough revenue in 2012 to cover their expenses without requiring financial support from the university. According to ACE, most of that money can be attributed directly to football.
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
What part of “other sports” is unclear? Football is paying the bill for them all.
Your claim,"How many students does that allow to get a better education?"
Other sports, full of more athletic scholarships, does not allow the real students to get a better education. There are some very rare public colleges where it might, but they are the exception. Further, "However, more often than not, college athletics programs are not fully self-supporting, even with football money."
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
I’m sticking to my story Willy. Let me ask you, how much do you think enrollment goes up at Alabama because of their football program and the recognition it brings the school? The same is true for dozens of colleges. You’re choosing to see the small picture. The university presidents know the answer to my question and they’re smarter than the both of us put together.
That's your right.
I wouldn't bet on that.................... The university presidents .................... they’re smarter than the both of us put together.
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
I'd expect you to think that.
And I'd expect you to overestimate them.
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
When it comes to making money and exploiting athletes, they're brilliant.
Athletic success does drive up enrollment, which is a good thing. BUT…a shrinking pool of potential college students (lower birth rates) and an increase in the possible students who see other viable options, has put universities in a bind. The amount of the annual budget spent on athletics (which usually fails to pay for itself) and “student life” components (think gyms, dining, other non academic stuff) and all the people to administer all that FAR exceeds what is spent on education.
Bottom line, all but the biggest unis have had to divert massive $$$ away from the classroom in order to market themselves to an annually shrinking pool of students, that budget shortfalls are significant and many are questioning why.
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
Smart institutions are exploiting the online option. Like everything else, it's not your grandmother's edition anymore.
You call what they're doing brilliant? I take Giamatti's view.
''The system went sour a long time ago and is only getting more bilious and more corrupt,'' says A. Bartlett Giamatti, commissioner of baseball and former president of Yale University. ''As soon as you pay some students (with an athletic scholarship) to perform an undergraduate extracurricular activity for the revenue purposes of the institution, you have corrupted a set of academic and educational values of the highest order. So it is not surprising to me that all the other abuses follow, as the night the day.''
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
Corrupt and brilliant and not mutually exclusive when it comes to money. In case you haven't noticed.
True. And that is a good way to buff up tuition paying enrollment numbers. Problem is that those students do not and should not pay the other fees that on-campus students do -- which is how many Universities and Colleges actually make money off of students. So, again, a trade-off. Additionally, it often takes more $$$ per online student in behind the scenes support than it does for traditional formats. Particularly, if the University does not already have the IT backbone in place. And most do not. Most paid out the nose during the past 18 months to external services to make stuff work.
Array title="pczach has a reputation beyond repute">
Let's also not forget the huge deals with Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc....
The universities will find a way for these businesses to fund even more now that student athletes are allowed to market themselves. They will find a way...they always do.
http://cafidatabase.knightcommission...re_the_money-0
This data seems to indicate that THE Ohio State operates at an annual loss. On average so does the rest of the Big 10 and FBS overall. While some of the average debt is just a drop in a bucket compared to the massive size of University budgets overall, it does indicate the idea that athletics pays for itself is certainly highly complicated.
For instance it is possible that the debt is inflated by planned capital improvements that are financed and it is fine...or....looking over some of the data on the linked site, there are many programs where spending/expenses is outpacing revenue by a significant amount.
I believe the claim was that, " ....consider that the college is making hundreds of millions of dollars off said athletes from gate and tv revenue. How many students does that allow to get a better education?" Can you find, or is it your experience, that the money made from big-time college athletics improves the education of the non athletics-participating student?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote