Wallace Renfro: "Profitability no indicator of importance of college athletics programs"

The link above is worth a read as information with which to respond to people who say women's sports and/or Title IX hurt universities because they don't generate revenue.

"There’s something wrong with that concept – that somehow or another, intercollegiate athletics is failing because it’s not paying its way," Renfro said at the workshop, which was held on the campus of the Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. "Take a look at a campus and take a look at the number of departments that don’t even come close to paying their way. They exist because the university believes it’s important to have those departments.

"What you have in higher education is a very complex system of cross-subsidization. There are a few areas in a few places that make a lot of money. Those monies are used to help pay for those other things that universities believe they must have if they’re going to have comprehensive university.

Imagine, for example, if people said we should cut history departments because they weren't profitable. That sounds rather Orwellian and thus frightening to me.

almost 2 years ago Nate Parham 1 comment 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The New Double Standard

There’s a lot to agree with in Renfro’s speech. There is prejudice against athletes on college campuses just as he describes, and I wouldn’t be surprised if a majority of professors at many schools would like to see intercollegiate athletics simply disappear.

As for his contention about the value of college athletics being beyond simple profits and losses, he’s exactly right about that too. Unfortunately, because of the way Title IX is enforced today, the college athletes who will have their programs judged solely by way of the balance sheet are almost entirely male.

The story on many campuses is very familiar: when a women’s team is cut for budget purposes, a Title IX complaint is invariably filed, and the team can count on sympathetic media coverage and probably even pro bono legal help. But when a men’s team is cut, there is no higher court. While there might be some grumbling, those teams almost always disappear without a trace.

In other cases, the bar is even higher for men’s sports. At the College Sports Council, we know of several instances when men’s teams have been able to raise enough money to fund their sport independently of the institution, only to be told that they would have to raise enough money to fully fund a companion women’s program as well.

Perhaps some might find these facts shocking, but it’s simply the current state of play in college athletics today.

by emcerlain on Mar 12, 2010 12:24 PM EST reply actions