So what, your school doesn't have a football team. BFD. Who cares? The school can get a reputation for academics. Ditto for the other big sports that waste everyone's time. |
I was on a student-funded, student-run ski team at my college. It had been that way for many decades. The school might have thrown us a couple hundred for gas money during the season. So, we had sports, but no hype. No one was recruited to help our student-run team. Why isn't this a better model for colleges.
Particularly PUBLIC colleges, where taxpayers pay for all this football nonsense.
Have you lost your mind? Have our universities known for the quality of the education they provide rather that the quality of their football teams? Sir, I want to see your citizenship papers immediately.
Nothing amateur about them.
Actually, Division I football makes a huge profit at all the major football schools.
College football subsidizes every other college sport, except for men's basketball, which makes a profit, too, at most major public universities.
There are 4 divisions in NCAA football:
Division 1 FBS
Division 1 FCS
Division 2
Division 3
Division 1 FBS is a huge cash cow for universities. Season tickets, TV revenue, sports paraphernalia, etc. generate millions in revenue every year for the schools. There is no way they will walk away from that money.
I don’t know how much money D1 FCS or D2 spend on their programs or how much revenue they make for their schools but do know that D3 schools do not offer athletic scholarships.
My wife and I recently watched the old Hollywood college musical Good News. In the movie, Peter Lawford was the BMOC because he was the star football player. However, he lamented that when he graduated he would lose that star status becuase back then, sports was something one did in college and that was it. Once the NFL became established and colleges became the farm team system of the NFL, it attracted athletically gifted people who really were not college material.