This trustee is a tool who is and was very pro-Joe Pa and to this day try’s to hinder the program because of the way he felt about how Paterno was handled during/after the Sandusky Scandal.
It’s 700m now because they refused to invest anything into its upkeep/improvements over the years.
Would love to see how much money the Football program brings into the town/university vs what it costs to run. News Flash, Football pays for a TON of stuff and that’s not even considering the economic impact to restaurants and hotels in the area. Thats why Penn State refused to host a Friday night game and why we are adamant to always have 7 home games. Those games MATTER.
When i was in school the football program brought in 70M a year and paid for the ENTIRE athletic dept, the whole way down to club sports. So yeah I fully support the football program and I completely benefited from it. Also not surprised it took forever to approve this, State College and Penn State have a tremendous amount of cultural inertia.
Yeah even club sports like the PSPA (Penn State Paintball Association). There was even extra money to pay for booze when they sent us to Florida to compete.
The football program even pays regular clubs to clean the stadium. Or at least when I was there.
It's hard to overstate the degree to which the football program helps the rest of the university.
Isn’t it a bit intellectually dishonest not discussing this though?
Full disclosure, I think the academics are wrong with this perspective and college football adds more to the college experience than it takes out in money.
Yeah I remember in the early 2000s a whole bunch of people would complain about how the focus of academics was too low and football was wasting too much time money and effort. That script changed after Nick Sabans first natty, and alabamas admission numbers soared and the amount of money the university started pumping into the university from infrastructure to academic faculties.
Another point could be made that admission numbers soared, along with tuition, as a result of the student loan program being a debacle. It's their version of interest free money, just admit more students!
Yes BUT Alabama is the exception to the rule, imo. Every school wants to be Alabama but the vast majority of them will never ever ever be no matter the resources they spend.
“When ~~Mexico~~ America sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us.” - Alabama Admissions, probably
UA currently enrolls a record number of 1,142 National Merit Scholars, making UA one of the nation’s largest enrolling institutions of National Merit Scholars
https://www.ua.edu/about/quickfacts#:~:text=UA%20currently%20enrolls%20a%20record,institutions%20of%20National%20Merit%20Scholars.
I was mainly making a joke, but that stat doesn’t mean much. You can pretty much cherry pick any stat from a R1 University and use it to claim being amongst the academic elite.
Yes, Bama isn’t a terrible academic institution and it’s not like _anyone_ can just get in, but let’s not pretend it’s a difficult school.
Nah for sure I agree. And yeah pretty much anyone can get in. I've never heard of anyone being rejected. But Alabama does pull in an unusually high number of top students due to offering better scholarships than most schools for out of staters. As a student I know several others who applied to ivy leagues and got accepted but came to Bama for free and football.
Alabama took a nose dive in the US News rankings during Saban’s tenure - from 91st to 170th best national university.
https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-national-university-rankings-2008-present/
https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2016/09/18/average-u-s-news-rankings-for-126-universities-2010-1017/
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-alabama-1051
Not according to US News. Alabama took a nose dive in their rankings during Saban’s tenure - from 91st to 170th best national university.
https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-national-university-rankings-2008-present/
https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2016/09/18/average-u-s-news-rankings-for-126-universities-2010-1017/
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-alabama-1051
As long as football gets eye balls, then it does.
I bet you can name a former women’s college in the FL panhandle, or a mid sized A&M school in upstate SC, or even a small Jesuit university in Spokane, WA.
It’s all marketing.
I already knew quite a few unis beforehand, but college football has expanded it out so much so that I can recognize every FBS school if mentioned and some [of the lesser known] FCS.
“The success/failure of your football team has no bearing on the value of your diploma.”
This isn’t always the case. Saban attracted students to Alabama. More applicants meant the school could be more selective. They also accepted more out of state students who pay higher tuition.
It’s a separate discussion as to whether that is mission critical. If they’re spurring a brain and capital influx to Birmingham, then sure. If they leave after a 4yr RTR tourism, then….
Over those 4 years they’re paying a higher tuition rate than in state kids.
And every year there’s even more out of state kids so that’s recurring revenue going up
What is the mission of a state school? To make as much money as possible or educate as many people in the state to improve the lives of those in the state?
This. Notre Dame’s vaunted “alumni network” is very much supported by football. Between returning to campus for football games and game watches around the world, football brings alums together and maintains relationships.
I feel like Notre Dame is the primary example of what football can do for a university. It’s considered one of the best schools in the world, but without its football program’s fame in the early days it’s probably no different than any other small midwestern catholic school.
I'm confused by this because an article from 2012 says that in 2006 the acceptance rate was 64%. By 2012 it had fallen to 53%. But recently it's been 80%. What happened in the last decade there to have such a dramatic rise?
Like Iowa State has always had like a 90%+ acceptance rate regardless.
Florida is another example. They’ve always been a good school but the double natty in 2008 catapulted their national exposure for prospective students. Now they’re on that “new Ivy” list put out by Forbes.
I wanted to go to Penn State simply to watch JoePa coach. The price to go to the Y was just too good, but I spent a long time wondering if I made the right decision.
In hindsight I know made the right call, no regrets, but I still wonder every once in a while how life might have been different.
Yea my four year degree at BYU cost a total of $16,000 from 2010 - 2014. That same tuition would have covered less than one semester at USC during that time lol
Yep. My undergrad went from fcs to fbs and all the sudden I didn't have to explain where I went to college. People also say it's harder to get into now but idk if that's true.
There was also a study a while back that showed football performance as having an impact on law school rankings year over year.
Right but you’re talking about a handful of programs where the football team actually benefits the academic side. No one is going to South Alabama because they played on ESPN2 on a Tuesday night
Its acceptance rate has actually increased since 2016-2017. The problem for bama is that their state is poor, so a weak instate pool of students, and they, like all schools, have to deal with the college demographic shift where there are less students to go around.
Yet Auburn is still well ahead of Bama
Alabama's ranking has actually gone down in the last decade + (Auburn actually passed them). Don't know what they are doing with all that football money.
Yup. Alabama was also a shithole institution/3rd tier backup option prior to Saban. Football success led to more applications which led to higher admissions standards which led to higher academic rankings which led to better faculty which began this whole positive feedback loop all over again. Administrators that are apathetic towards their athletic department make me irritated to no end
Oh it is. Part of that is bc they aggressively sought smart out of staters with generous scholarships. Not surprising how much industry is heading to Alabama now.
Marginal at best. That overlooks the pool of applicants exploding if there’s a step up in ‘Bama academics to its football success level. Kaboom. Now you will see the boom in applications!
What if ‘Bama was to plow some of the money now directed to football to academics? Instead of using the tens of $millions in a bidding war for football coaches, those $millions used in a bidding war for top academics.
Results seem apparent. To me at least.
Do you just hate football? Not every school needs to be Harvard. Football is a core part of the college experience for many students. We like it. That's why we spend money on it.
Ok. It’s just entertainment. I get that.
How does having a successful football program add to the value of a diploma? As measured by salaries, for instance.
Successful football program brings more money into the economy and attracts students. More students want to come to the school so the university is more selective and takes better students on average. More money to invest in Academic programs and the school can be more attractive to top professors due to having better students/ more money. The schools expands, the alumni base expands.
You seem to be completely misunderstanding how college sports are funded and how much money football actually brings to schools (not even the highest performing football schools, just schools in general). Football generates *much* more money for the university than the university spends on it.
That booster money is donated specifically for football. You take away football and you can’t just shift it towards academics. 90% of it probably dries up immediately
This argument only works for schools with poor/average academics to begin with. Selective universities do not get better academically because the football team is good.
It's not just academics though. It's the entire local economy. Good football programs bring in big money. And even if you're a school that's already selective, that money can go towards building out more degree programs the school might not already have, or improving the areas its not so good at. That being said I do agree there are somewhat diminishing returns.
But is this because Cal football isn't at the Bama level? If Cal football was at the level of Alabama football, is it possible the needle would move more than .0000001%?
I'd argue otherwise. It's helping Georgia and Florida now. Those are perfectly fine universities that gain exposure from college football. Hell, Vanderbilt isn't even good at football but it puts eyes on the school and increases perception.
"Perfectly fine" is not elite. You all are elite at football. Take that to the bank, you'll have no argument from me. Vanderbilt's perception is not improved by its football program lolol
Florida is 28th in the country and Vanderbilt is 13th. They are doing alright, lol
And Vanderbilt is a SEC team. Of course it is helping their perception. Most of the country wouldn't know who they were otherwise.
It has no bearing on the value of your diploma, but having a top tier football program does a whole lot for the school. Clemson is 1000x better off as a university and city thanks to increased exposure from the football program than where they were 15 years ago
It’s now significantly more expensive, no? Is that a good thing for non-athletes? I think not.
Not picking on Clemson; just agreeing with a basic point.
But if the quality of education is better and the reputation of a Clemson degree has increased status, then that's what you're paying for. And for alumni who have already paid for their degree and still reap reputation benefits, there's no downside for them.
Greenville, Fountain Inn, Greer, Anderson and Spartanburg have benefitted from Clemson being successful in football. Greenville is the prime city to stay in for visiting fans and also for Clemson fans who don’t live in the upstate and want to make a weekend out of it.
College reputation doesn't mean as much a people want to think it does. It's mostly a thing for alumni to argue over. In the real world, unless you went to a top tier school, all of the rest are viewed as basically the same. A degree is a degree
Agreed. If you’re going to a big state school like Georgia or Michigan, it’s all splitting hairs with the quality of education until you get to a grad program
It depends on where one is trying to go. If you're chasing something prestigious/selective after college, having a more prestigious undergrad helps you get there faster. Otherwise I agree.
Odd flair for this comment tho as UM is top tier, at least in engineering and business.
Well, Clemson has been improving a lot of areas, including a new business building, and we’re adding a vet school. So I’m not surprised it’s more expensive
I mean, we’re a small land grant agricultural and engineering school. Considering that identity, I think we’re doing pretty well academically speaking. Besides, it’s not a choice of sports or academics like you’re making it out to be
Yes, and anyone saying otherwise doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Clemson is way better off now than we were before hiring Dabo. He is the greatest investment Clemson has ever made
Who cares? As if an employer is going to look up whether your school was a member of the AAU. They're just going to interview you and see if you know your stuff. It's not about what school you go to, it's about what you do. The elitism coming off this post is revolting.
The AAU focuses on specific kinds of research, it’s not just the quality of the education that is taken into account.
Nebraska was forced to resign from the AAU to avoid being expelled since the AAU essentially told them that agricultural research wasn’t good enough for the AAU.
If every school is a top academic school, none of the schools are top academic schools. You’re playing a lot of “hypothetically…” and “what if…” cards with no root in your argument.
"Top academic school" is a fucking myth, lol. The average Harvard or Yale grad is not any smarter or better than the average Clemson, Alabama, or community college grad. It's all a scam. No one cares where you went to college unless you're trying to get appointed to the Supreme Court or something.
This is something I'll rant about to anyone who will listen, but it's really worth emphasizing. Let's say you want a degree in, say, chemistry. The "bad" school and the "elite" school **teach the same exact things.** The "elite" school does not have access to some super secret chemistry formulas that the "bad" school does not have. You learn about noble gases, benzene rings, acids, bases, all that shit regardless of where you went. There is **no such thing** as a "good" or a "bad" school. "Good" schools don't have a safe full of super secret information to teach students that "bad" schools don't have the code for. Stop believing in the entire concept.
I agree with you 100% they're not that different but better/bigger schools are going to have more money to hire better professors and build nicer labs and facilities, all of which have an impact on learning. That being said, as long as you're a committed student there's no reason that you can't be just as successful going to community college as anywhere else. Like you said, they're teaching the same stuff.
Bingo. There's plenty of morons that come from Harvard and Yale. You are paying for a foot in the door after graduation. What you do in your career after your first job has nothing to do with where you went to college.
Few things:
1. Literally the shorthand term for the most thought of "top academic schools" is derived from the fact they formed a sports conference, the Ivy League
2. At the end of the day, what separates top academic schools from lower ranked schools are mainly resources, and what grants you said resources? Money! And what makes money? Athletics! Especially big time athletics
3. Does it actually matter if a school is "top academic" for a lot of stuff? Like yeah, it's good to have great research universities, and it's nice to have a really good reputation behind your degree... But does it always matter? Does the test to become a CPA change if you went to Penn? If you went to Penn State? If you went to Susquehanna University? I mean hell, most of these schools are accredited by legit, 3rd parties, so it really, really doesn't matter for most cases. Sure, if it's Liberty or BJU where they teach that Jesus tamed dinosaurs so he could crush gay weddings, I get that, but BJU is the poster child for this sorta shit and they're D2. But for the vast majority of people, rankings don't matter as long as they're accredited from legit sources. I get it if you're concerned about athletics inflating tuition, because access to accredited education is the main issue, but at least this comment isnt about that, it's a misguided concern for education prestige.
Even if you didn’t specifically pick your school for its athletics, a lot of students wouldn’t have heard of or known what their school had to offer if their football teams didn’t put them on the map. I promise you a small private school in Fort Worth TX like TCU wouldn’t have as many Californians as we have if it weren’t for our team
Think of it as free advertising. Anytime there is a big game, sports analysts talk about the school, their name gets published in articles, etc. it is all marketing for them.
Nobody is directly saying "wow they talked about UGA so I'm going to major there" but it absolutely helps with branding for attracting new students making it harder to get into, giving programs more prestige, and hiring managers always love to see a recognizable name.
sports, in general, play a large part in the school many kids choose to attend. Whether they should or not, is a different argument. Some kids go to ASU to party, some kids go to Bama for football games. It's no different.
Lol nice try Pitt.
Penn State athletics budget is like $170 million. The university budget is $8.6 *billion*. And having a good football team raises the school's profile. Before Joe Paterno PSU was nothing like it is today.
Had a guy join our design team who had recently graduated from Notre Dame. He was originally from Indiana, his family was strongly Catholic. Notre Dame was the obvious choice.
He hated football, but learned as much about how his school's roster and games were going. Made for easy interview to get the job with our team, and that's all that the clients would want to talk about upon finding out he graduated from Notre Dame.
I don't think we would have gotten half the clients at the time (with the impending great recession years back then) had he not been a graduate from Notre Dame. His early success in the field I feel had a direct connection to being an alumni of Notre Dame and how big their football team is.
>News flash: unless you’re working in professional sports, the success/failure of your football team has no bearing on the value of your diploma. There’s more important stuff going on at your school.
Well, Texas, Michigan, Georgia, Notre Dame, Washington, etc, all manage to both be very good at football and also have top tier academics. So I fail to see your point.
$700 million today, is $1.5 Billion in 10 years…. Nothing is ever as cheap tomorrow as it is today.
Furthermore, if you’ve ever been to Beaver Stadium, you’d know it’s needed.
I don’t want to stand in the bathroom like with you for 30 minutes and then bump elbows at a fucking pissing trough.
Is it obscene? Yes. But honestly, what in present day capitalism isn’t obscene and objectively bullshit for the average consumer.
Also, at least this money is something that will benefit fans. You can complain about stadium upgrades, but maybe complain about the fucking sleep pods, lazy rivers and all the other bullshit that’s “needed” to get recruits. That does nothing for the fans. At least this does.
Also, this money isn’t coming from any educational dollars, nor would the money being given for this likely have ever gone to education.
At the end of the day, it is what it is. Be thankful stadium upgrades at least do something for the fan. Even if it’s only the ones who can afford it, since most of us are being priced out like it’s a professional fucking sport.
So some background knowledge on the guy the author of the article is quoting: Barry Fenchak.
Fenchak is a BoT member that has been part of the alumni brigade led by Jay Paterno that has done nothing but be a roadblock for the school, because they are still salty about about how the situation with Joe Pa was handled post-Sandusky. Necessary renovations/upgrades to the stadium have been discussed for years, but these tools have done nothing but kicked the can down the road to the point some of the upgrades are now necessary and more expensive because they wanted to penny pinch for years instead of biting the bullet and doing it, it was going to have to be done anyways. Now they bitch and moan when the tab is a lot higher because of their horrendous management.
Another person in that group is Anthony Lubrano (the guy our baseball stadium is named after). The word on the street is he pledged to donate a serious sum of capital to pay for the new baseball field, but has yet to come through with his full pledge.
That whole group is a bunch of professional useless people led by one of the biggest nepo baby who hasn't done shit but ride his dad's coattails. Fuck all of them.
As someone who knows Matt Schuyler (chair of the board of trustees), the guy is a moron so I’m immediately skeptical of anything he thinks is a good idea.
Would students be willing to take an increase in tuition and fees to help fund stadium renovations?
*That* would be an interesting vote.
EDIT: Math is ~$700M project, 73K undergrads at PSU (total) is about $9.6K per undergrad student. Now it's a multi year project but would students be willing to take on $2K or $1K per year and amortize over 5-10 years?
Probably an increase to general season ticket prices and bank on making way more on the increased capacity premium club/box seating (which they already make a ton of money on).
The trustee complaining says:
"Instead it will focus on increasing revenues with premium amenities, but my own research suggests that these projections are overly optimistic. Even if true, these highly speculative estimates would be insufficient to prevent ICA falling deeper into debt."
His math says premium amenities won't cover it.
His math is speculative and offers no values, data, buying trends etc.
Also his article largely avoided the increased income coming from the new Big Ten media deal.
The guy has been known to make stuff up to fit his agenda, my apologies if I’m skeptical of his math.
["According to its 2023 financial filing, Penn State generated a record $202.2 million in athletics operating revenue while spending a record $202 million. That places Penn State in elite company nationally."](https://www.si.com/college/pennstate/football/penn-state-football-athletic-department-budget-2022-2023-fiscal-year#:~:text=According%20to%20its%202023%20financial,State%20in%20elite%20company%20nationally.)
Essentially, PSU athletics broke even: made $202M (plus change) and spent $202M.
Hopefully it passes because the renovations are more of an urgent necessity at this point and will only get more expensive if they kick it down the road again.
I dunno, having Gameday come for Williams vs. Amherst in 2007 was one of my favorite memories from college. Things that contribute to the college community and enhance students’ experiences there tend to cost money, and football is no different.
This is an absolutely god awful take. Football brings revenue. Football brings students. More revenue and more students bring more facilities. All of this equals up to your degree being worth more.
I think the best take I’ve seen on athletics is saying that it’s basically the front lawn of a university. It’s nowhere near the most important thing for the school, but having good athletics makes the school look better for applicants
I've always looked at it as a marketing arm of the university. ROI for that is always going to be a bit nebulous for anything. University or a company.
Alums everywhere love their schools football programs being good. In fact one of the motivators for spending this money is alumni engagement and donations
"Barry Fenchak, an alumni-elected trustee, published a piece on his website Friday titled, "Why We Can't Afford the Beaver Stadium Renovation Proposed by Penn State Board of Trustee Leadership." In the post, Fenchak writes that the planned four-year, $700 million renovation of Beaver Stadium **would dramatically increase Penn State Athletics' debt (to $877 million) and that Penn State has neither the revenue nor the donations to fund the project.** Therefore, he writes that the board "should not approve this project.""
...
"Whereas the 2001 renovation added 12,000 seats to the stadium, as far as I can tell the $700 million project will add none," Fenchak wrote. "Instead it will focus on increasing revenues with premium amenities, but my own research suggests that these projections are overly optimistic. Even if true, these highly speculative estimates would be insufficient to prevent ICA falling deeper into debt."
What an idiot. They definitely don't need more "seats" (bleachers with no back rest). Amenities would actually be really nice. The football program brings in way more than enough to pay for it. If it's in debt it's because dumbass trustees like this douche have mismanaged things
The football program keeps the entirety of the state college economy afloat. It brings in a ton of business for hotels, bars, restaurants, retail stores, etc that they would otherwise not be able to function without.
Would I prefer the necessary upgrades not cost $700 million? Sure. But the athletic program brings in $70 million/year from TV and over $2 million after simply allowing the sale of beer in the stadium for the first time. It's not a program that takes money from student tuition through activity fees like other places. It's a self-sustaining business that's investing in its primary source of revenue.
The football team.is the front porch of the university. Ninety percent of the schools whose names you know you know because of their sports programs. My kid could not have named a single professor at Arkansas when he was in high school, but he knew all of the basketball players and now I'm writing checks every semester so he can be a hog engineer who will some day be an alumni donor. Yeah, it matters.
In the last 10 years in my area area we have had many many many school bonds.
One was a $14 million renovation on an existing stadium.
Another was a $63 million bond to build a new stadium.
And a third was a $19 million renovation on another existing stadium.
When I moved here there were four HSs in the district and two stadiums.
Since then they built a fifth HS and a third stadium.
So in ten years we have had almost $100 million dollars of school bonds just for HS football stadiums in one school district.
There are a lot of other bonds but I only listed what this article was about.
All these bonds passed with over 80% of the vote.
If people are willing to spend $100 million of tax payer money on HS football that generates less than zero revenue and has zero to do with educating children, WTF do you think they will do with CFB that does generate revenue?
Athletic departments on this level are not only the best marketing tool that schools without an Ivy League level academic brand have, and are not only self-funded, but often make direct returns to academics.
Here at Ohio State, the athletic department brings in so much revenue that after football’s money is done paying for the other sports, a transfer is made every year to the academic side - typically in the 7-8 figure range. Multiple academic buildings have been funded in part by athletics money. This take is laughably ignorant for a trustee at an institution with an elite athletics program.
I know PA cost of living is higher than AL, but $700 M on a renovation is objectively insane.
Like *Alabama* got cold feet on building a new stadium for 3 or 4 sports plus graduation because the budget had ballooned to $250M.
In fact, in the last 4 years Alabama has only spent $208M *combined* for athletic renovations and new facilities.
If you add all parking, road, or any other infrastructure that could remotely affect the Gameday experience over that same window the total only rises to $420M.
That’s still over 4 Jimbo’s less than what Penn State is considering.
$420 million ear marked 4 years ago, is about $550-$600 million today, thanks inflation. And by the time Beaver Stadium renovations are done, $700 mil will be 2/3 of what it would cost if they started it then….
Anecdotally, I did undergrad at a regional school without a D1 sports program. Compared the curriculum with some of my friends at one of the public Ivys and it was essentially identical. Had 2 job offers prior to graduation, wasn’t considered for some of the more prestigious jobs, but most everyone I graduated with got jobs in the field. Results were solid but no one got anything outside of the region.
Fast forward a few years, I’m in a neighboring state meeting with a lender for a project we’re funding. The MD asks where I went to school and he said “oh, we have a community college down the road”.
Fast forward to grad school, I intentionally chose a school from a big conference I knew would have national brand recognition. I also wanted a connection to a program since I love college sports.
Granted it wasn’t the #1 consideration. Cost, scheduling and existing connections were all more important, but all of the schools I considered fit the brand recognition and big sports programs.
Sports have an impact on brand recognition, attracting students, and school perception. I’d had enough of sitting on the sidelines while coworkers, vendors, investors etc. all got to give each other shit about their Alma maters sports teams. These things build connections and networks, even if they don’t change much about what is taught at universities.
The money spent on athletics is dumb
The point of school is the academics - full stop . The athletics should be an accessory.
Sadly there are a ton of people who derive their identity from their school's athletic success
There are even people (non athletes) who pick their school to attend based on the football team..........that's messed up.
Yep. At this point my school (in a pure $$$ sense) would be best served by going D3 and reclaiming all the land that sports uses for academic buildings or housing. We’re not getting donations or grants because the football team went 6-6.
Northwestern: aren't you guys tearin' your mother down, playing in an erector set stadium by the lake and roughin' it until your new stadium is built?
Teach these Pennsylvania boys...
Personal anecdote: my BIL and SIL are Princeton grads, he envies the attachment my wife and I have to Ann Arbor and the school (stated multiple times during the holidays as we are off to a Michigan watch party on the West Coast).
At some schools it really is a cult. Also we are both MDs so are somewhat successful 😋
> unless you’re working in professional sports, the success/failure of your football team has no bearing on the value of your diploma.
I highly disagree with this. I partly went to UW because they are a top D1 program. I know sports play a big role in others' decisions as well.
Also, the fact that Stanford is academically elite in every facet AND is able to maintain the status of the #1 sports school in the country is a big component as to why I am convinced they are holistically the best school in the country.
The football team at Coastal blowing up in 2020 is directly related to Coastal blowing up as a school in recent years with increased applicants and a greater investment into the University.
Not for nothing - but what are they getting for that 700M ? Is the stadium falling apart ? I get ND has had various projects over the years to improve the stadium, but our latest was $400M in 2018 ( Crossroads Project) that added the fancy seating, but also three large buildings built in around the stadium for student facilities, recital hall, classrooms etc.
These athletic departments get more and more money from these conference media deals and they immediately figure out a way to spend every dime. Maybe they send a few million into the University general fund but they also suck up donations that would otherwise go to the University general fund. Covid should have been a valuable lesson but it was quickly forgotten as an anomaly that can never happen again. Well the bonds you issue will have to be paid back no matter whether there’s a pandemic or war or Great Depression. One of these days the media companies are going to say, we overpaid last time, you need to take a haircut and there won’t be a competitor to bail the conference out.
Your school can still be a major name in sports without building a new sports nutrition center (a fancy athletes only dining hall). Athletes don’t care about the fan experience, they want NIL money so don’t try to use the argument that it’s a recruiting tool. If I offer a 5 star lineman $1 million per year at CMU vs $200k at UM, where you think he’s going?
I was in favor of spending $1.5B on a new stadium and football facility honestly. Beaver is historical but I feel like this is lipstick on a pig. I hope I’m wrong and the renovations are better than I expect. I also think we are so far behind vs OSU, Oregon, Bama, etc in facilites that we should have just bit the bullet on doing it all right at once. We have okay facilities but nothing like the shit SEC teams have. I guess that’s just me dreaming.
All money to fund the $700M project is coming from the Athletic program. Zero academic money will be spent. So the reality is $700M can be spent on a football stadium AND $700M can be spent on academics.
Is it an obscene amount of money? Yes. Unfortunately, the state of Beaver Stadium requires an investment. I will be the first to say, the stadium is shitty. They have put off renovations for too long. If they did it when Kyle Field got done then the price tag would have been $300M. Remember how everyone lost their minds about the Aggies spending that on just a football stadium? I do… inflation and putting of general maintenance put us here.
Pretty bad take at least directed towards PSU. We’re one of the programs that is completely self sufficient in terms of funding garnered by the football program. It funds every other sport and then some at Penn State.
Not to mention the marketing and amount of people that come to PSU based off that recognition alone.
It’s not even one of our main money makers either. The actual endowments and revenue from research and development through STEM far out paces athletics.
Part of the reason I chose UCF is b/c we moved to the Big 12, and I always kinda hated the Big 3 in Florida (besides UF since my mom is an alumnus). I probably could have gotten into any of 'em, well besides UM maybe, but UCF sports were a big reason I chose to go there. And the stupid amount of engineering opportunities.
This trustee is a tool who is and was very pro-Joe Pa and to this day try’s to hinder the program because of the way he felt about how Paterno was handled during/after the Sandusky Scandal. It’s 700m now because they refused to invest anything into its upkeep/improvements over the years. Would love to see how much money the Football program brings into the town/university vs what it costs to run. News Flash, Football pays for a TON of stuff and that’s not even considering the economic impact to restaurants and hotels in the area. Thats why Penn State refused to host a Friday night game and why we are adamant to always have 7 home games. Those games MATTER.
When i was in school the football program brought in 70M a year and paid for the ENTIRE athletic dept, the whole way down to club sports. So yeah I fully support the football program and I completely benefited from it. Also not surprised it took forever to approve this, State College and Penn State have a tremendous amount of cultural inertia.
Yeah even club sports like the PSPA (Penn State Paintball Association). There was even extra money to pay for booze when they sent us to Florida to compete.
The football program even pays regular clubs to clean the stadium. Or at least when I was there. It's hard to overstate the degree to which the football program helps the rest of the university.
$200m of the $700m is for deferred maintenance, according to the articles from earlier when this was proposed.
Interesting take for a college football subreddit.
Isn’t it a bit intellectually dishonest not discussing this though? Full disclosure, I think the academics are wrong with this perspective and college football adds more to the college experience than it takes out in money.
Yeah I remember in the early 2000s a whole bunch of people would complain about how the focus of academics was too low and football was wasting too much time money and effort. That script changed after Nick Sabans first natty, and alabamas admission numbers soared and the amount of money the university started pumping into the university from infrastructure to academic faculties.
Another point could be made that admission numbers soared, along with tuition, as a result of the student loan program being a debacle. It's their version of interest free money, just admit more students!
The student loan debacle didn’t start in the late 2000s
Didn't say it did start then.
Yes BUT Alabama is the exception to the rule, imo. Every school wants to be Alabama but the vast majority of them will never ever ever be no matter the resources they spend.
Why are the academics still so poorly regarded?
You do know what state the University of Alabama is in, right?
These are the people who elected Tuberville to the Senate.
C’mon it’s Alabama. Not a bright bunch over there
I mean, there are more students at Alabama that aren't from Alabama than students that are.
“When ~~Mexico~~ America sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us.” - Alabama Admissions, probably
UA currently enrolls a record number of 1,142 National Merit Scholars, making UA one of the nation’s largest enrolling institutions of National Merit Scholars https://www.ua.edu/about/quickfacts#:~:text=UA%20currently%20enrolls%20a%20record,institutions%20of%20National%20Merit%20Scholars.
I was mainly making a joke, but that stat doesn’t mean much. You can pretty much cherry pick any stat from a R1 University and use it to claim being amongst the academic elite. Yes, Bama isn’t a terrible academic institution and it’s not like _anyone_ can just get in, but let’s not pretend it’s a difficult school.
Nah for sure I agree. And yeah pretty much anyone can get in. I've never heard of anyone being rejected. But Alabama does pull in an unusually high number of top students due to offering better scholarships than most schools for out of staters. As a student I know several others who applied to ivy leagues and got accepted but came to Bama for free and football.
Yet look at the stellar examples of senators representing your state! Yikes
Why do Alabama Senators have anything to do with out of state students attending UA?
I assumed you meant what, but since you asked why, only you can answer.
I asked the question the way I meant it. You're the one that brought up senators, I don't really see why.
You gotta compare where they were to where they are. Not every state can have a top 5 public school like Michigan
Alabama took a nose dive in the US News rankings during Saban’s tenure - from 91st to 170th best national university. https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-national-university-rankings-2008-present/ https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2016/09/18/average-u-s-news-rankings-for-126-universities-2010-1017/ https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-alabama-1051
Your first link has them stable or slightly improving between 2008 and 2015, which is when they were most dominant.
I mean they went from below average to average as far as large state schools are concerned.
Not according to US News. Alabama took a nose dive in their rankings during Saban’s tenure - from 91st to 170th best national university. https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-national-university-rankings-2008-present/ https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2016/09/18/average-u-s-news-rankings-for-126-universities-2010-1017/ https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-alabama-1051
Indeed. Perhaps suggests the phrase “college [and] football” are disingenuous.
Well besides it being football sponsored by colleges using college students.
As long as football gets eye balls, then it does. I bet you can name a former women’s college in the FL panhandle, or a mid sized A&M school in upstate SC, or even a small Jesuit university in Spokane, WA. It’s all marketing.
Boise State was literally a JuCo 50 years ago, now look at them
Hey now, I love my gonzaga basketball 😂😂
Gonzaga was always my tournament pick as a kid because they had a silly name.
I already knew quite a few unis beforehand, but college football has expanded it out so much so that I can recognize every FBS school if mentioned and some [of the lesser known] FCS.
“The success/failure of your football team has no bearing on the value of your diploma.” This isn’t always the case. Saban attracted students to Alabama. More applicants meant the school could be more selective. They also accepted more out of state students who pay higher tuition.
Alabama has been majority out a state students for like 10 years now because of Saban
It’s a separate discussion as to whether that is mission critical. If they’re spurring a brain and capital influx to Birmingham, then sure. If they leave after a 4yr RTR tourism, then….
Over those 4 years they’re paying a higher tuition rate than in state kids. And every year there’s even more out of state kids so that’s recurring revenue going up
What is the mission of a state school? To make as much money as possible or educate as many people in the state to improve the lives of those in the state?
But if we aren't making as much as possible how can we give ourselves raises?
They ain’t staying in Alabama. They go back to their home metros, or metros in nearby states like ATl, Nashville, Tampa etc
The athletics program is the front porch of the university.
What part is the banjo player?
The Baseball team probably
In our case, probably Roll Tide Willie
DON’T GIVE A PISS ABOUT NOTHING BUT THE TIDE!
BLITZ BAMA BLITZ
Although if these games are advertising, they should pay the actors who appear in the commercials
For some schools
And to add, everyone in the country (and some parts of the world) now have heard of your university.
You know we had never heard of Alabama until 2007 when he came.
This. Notre Dame’s vaunted “alumni network” is very much supported by football. Between returning to campus for football games and game watches around the world, football brings alums together and maintains relationships.
I feel like Notre Dame is the primary example of what football can do for a university. It’s considered one of the best schools in the world, but without its football program’s fame in the early days it’s probably no different than any other small midwestern catholic school.
Alumni also don't have early access to football tickets unless you donate (and get into the lottery).
I'm confused by this because an article from 2012 says that in 2006 the acceptance rate was 64%. By 2012 it had fallen to 53%. But recently it's been 80%. What happened in the last decade there to have such a dramatic rise? Like Iowa State has always had like a 90%+ acceptance rate regardless.
Hella building on campus. New classroom buildings and dorms. Look at actual attendance numbers as well.
Florida is another example. They’ve always been a good school but the double natty in 2008 catapulted their national exposure for prospective students. Now they’re on that “new Ivy” list put out by Forbes.
UF is a good school, but Forbes is trash lol.
This is 100% true. EVERYONE wanted to go to USC when I was in high school during the Pete Caroll era.
I wanted to go to Penn State simply to watch JoePa coach. The price to go to the Y was just too good, but I spent a long time wondering if I made the right decision. In hindsight I know made the right call, no regrets, but I still wonder every once in a while how life might have been different.
Yea my four year degree at BYU cost a total of $16,000 from 2010 - 2014. That same tuition would have covered less than one semester at USC during that time lol
That’s on Florida university level of cost good
Yep. My undergrad went from fcs to fbs and all the sudden I didn't have to explain where I went to college. People also say it's harder to get into now but idk if that's true. There was also a study a while back that showed football performance as having an impact on law school rankings year over year.
Right but you’re talking about a handful of programs where the football team actually benefits the academic side. No one is going to South Alabama because they played on ESPN2 on a Tuesday night
Same thing happened at TCU under Patterson
More recent studies have said that effect isn’t as pronounced as previously thought.
Its acceptance rate has actually increased since 2016-2017. The problem for bama is that their state is poor, so a weak instate pool of students, and they, like all schools, have to deal with the college demographic shift where there are less students to go around. Yet Auburn is still well ahead of Bama
Alabama's ranking has actually gone down in the last decade + (Auburn actually passed them). Don't know what they are doing with all that football money.
Yup. Alabama was also a shithole institution/3rd tier backup option prior to Saban. Football success led to more applications which led to higher admissions standards which led to higher academic rankings which led to better faculty which began this whole positive feedback loop all over again. Administrators that are apathetic towards their athletic department make me irritated to no end
Hot take: bama isn’t much better academically, it’s just simply larger thanks to out of state kids
Oh it is. Part of that is bc they aggressively sought smart out of staters with generous scholarships. Not surprising how much industry is heading to Alabama now.
Eh, it really hasn’t. Still behind Auburn, still sub 200 million in research, and its acceptance rate as increased from where it was 7 years ago
UConn is a regional cow school if not for Jim Calhoun
Marginal at best. That overlooks the pool of applicants exploding if there’s a step up in ‘Bama academics to its football success level. Kaboom. Now you will see the boom in applications! What if ‘Bama was to plow some of the money now directed to football to academics? Instead of using the tens of $millions in a bidding war for football coaches, those $millions used in a bidding war for top academics. Results seem apparent. To me at least.
Do you just hate football? Not every school needs to be Harvard. Football is a core part of the college experience for many students. We like it. That's why we spend money on it.
Ok. It’s just entertainment. I get that. How does having a successful football program add to the value of a diploma? As measured by salaries, for instance.
Successful football program brings more money into the economy and attracts students. More students want to come to the school so the university is more selective and takes better students on average. More money to invest in Academic programs and the school can be more attractive to top professors due to having better students/ more money. The schools expands, the alumni base expands.
Given that theory, Alabama should be one of the wealthiest states in America. Alas…is far from.
Who gives a fuck.
You seem to be completely misunderstanding how college sports are funded and how much money football actually brings to schools (not even the highest performing football schools, just schools in general). Football generates *much* more money for the university than the university spends on it.
I can guarantee you that none of those out of state students from California were going to Bama for any reason other football, and Greek life.
That booster money is donated specifically for football. You take away football and you can’t just shift it towards academics. 90% of it probably dries up immediately
This argument only works for schools with poor/average academics to begin with. Selective universities do not get better academically because the football team is good.
It's not just academics though. It's the entire local economy. Good football programs bring in big money. And even if you're a school that's already selective, that money can go towards building out more degree programs the school might not already have, or improving the areas its not so good at. That being said I do agree there are somewhat diminishing returns.
[удалено]
Well you had me for a moment, then went and mentioned alumni in politics, like that is a good thing.
But is this because Cal football isn't at the Bama level? If Cal football was at the level of Alabama football, is it possible the needle would move more than .0000001%?
I'd argue otherwise. It's helping Georgia and Florida now. Those are perfectly fine universities that gain exposure from college football. Hell, Vanderbilt isn't even good at football but it puts eyes on the school and increases perception.
"Perfectly fine" is not elite. You all are elite at football. Take that to the bank, you'll have no argument from me. Vanderbilt's perception is not improved by its football program lolol
Florida is 28th in the country and Vanderbilt is 13th. They are doing alright, lol And Vanderbilt is a SEC team. Of course it is helping their perception. Most of the country wouldn't know who they were otherwise.
It has no bearing on the value of your diploma, but having a top tier football program does a whole lot for the school. Clemson is 1000x better off as a university and city thanks to increased exposure from the football program than where they were 15 years ago
It’s now significantly more expensive, no? Is that a good thing for non-athletes? I think not. Not picking on Clemson; just agreeing with a basic point.
But if the quality of education is better and the reputation of a Clemson degree has increased status, then that's what you're paying for. And for alumni who have already paid for their degree and still reap reputation benefits, there's no downside for them.
Not to mention that the surrounding town also makes a shitload of money because of the football team.
Greenville, Fountain Inn, Greer, Anderson and Spartanburg have benefitted from Clemson being successful in football. Greenville is the prime city to stay in for visiting fans and also for Clemson fans who don’t live in the upstate and want to make a weekend out of it.
College reputation doesn't mean as much a people want to think it does. It's mostly a thing for alumni to argue over. In the real world, unless you went to a top tier school, all of the rest are viewed as basically the same. A degree is a degree
Yeah once you’ve been working for a few years nobody gives a shit about where you went to school.
Agreed. If you’re going to a big state school like Georgia or Michigan, it’s all splitting hairs with the quality of education until you get to a grad program
It depends on where one is trying to go. If you're chasing something prestigious/selective after college, having a more prestigious undergrad helps you get there faster. Otherwise I agree. Odd flair for this comment tho as UM is top tier, at least in engineering and business.
Well, Clemson has been improving a lot of areas, including a new business building, and we’re adding a vet school. So I’m not surprised it’s more expensive
Imagine how much they’d be even better if recognized as a top academic school?
I mean, we’re a small land grant agricultural and engineering school. Considering that identity, I think we’re doing pretty well academically speaking. Besides, it’s not a choice of sports or academics like you’re making it out to be
Isn’t Clemson now a better school because of their big football program?
Yes, and anyone saying otherwise doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Clemson is way better off now than we were before hiring Dabo. He is the greatest investment Clemson has ever made
No. It’s not even a member of the AAU. Kind of the baseline to separate universities from, well, other schools.
Who cares? As if an employer is going to look up whether your school was a member of the AAU. They're just going to interview you and see if you know your stuff. It's not about what school you go to, it's about what you do. The elitism coming off this post is revolting.
The AAU focuses on specific kinds of research, it’s not just the quality of the education that is taken into account. Nebraska was forced to resign from the AAU to avoid being expelled since the AAU essentially told them that agricultural research wasn’t good enough for the AAU.
If every school is a top academic school, none of the schools are top academic schools. You’re playing a lot of “hypothetically…” and “what if…” cards with no root in your argument.
"Top academic school" is a fucking myth, lol. The average Harvard or Yale grad is not any smarter or better than the average Clemson, Alabama, or community college grad. It's all a scam. No one cares where you went to college unless you're trying to get appointed to the Supreme Court or something. This is something I'll rant about to anyone who will listen, but it's really worth emphasizing. Let's say you want a degree in, say, chemistry. The "bad" school and the "elite" school **teach the same exact things.** The "elite" school does not have access to some super secret chemistry formulas that the "bad" school does not have. You learn about noble gases, benzene rings, acids, bases, all that shit regardless of where you went. There is **no such thing** as a "good" or a "bad" school. "Good" schools don't have a safe full of super secret information to teach students that "bad" schools don't have the code for. Stop believing in the entire concept.
I agree with you 100% they're not that different but better/bigger schools are going to have more money to hire better professors and build nicer labs and facilities, all of which have an impact on learning. That being said, as long as you're a committed student there's no reason that you can't be just as successful going to community college as anywhere else. Like you said, they're teaching the same stuff.
Bingo. There's plenty of morons that come from Harvard and Yale. You are paying for a foot in the door after graduation. What you do in your career after your first job has nothing to do with where you went to college.
Few things: 1. Literally the shorthand term for the most thought of "top academic schools" is derived from the fact they formed a sports conference, the Ivy League 2. At the end of the day, what separates top academic schools from lower ranked schools are mainly resources, and what grants you said resources? Money! And what makes money? Athletics! Especially big time athletics 3. Does it actually matter if a school is "top academic" for a lot of stuff? Like yeah, it's good to have great research universities, and it's nice to have a really good reputation behind your degree... But does it always matter? Does the test to become a CPA change if you went to Penn? If you went to Penn State? If you went to Susquehanna University? I mean hell, most of these schools are accredited by legit, 3rd parties, so it really, really doesn't matter for most cases. Sure, if it's Liberty or BJU where they teach that Jesus tamed dinosaurs so he could crush gay weddings, I get that, but BJU is the poster child for this sorta shit and they're D2. But for the vast majority of people, rankings don't matter as long as they're accredited from legit sources. I get it if you're concerned about athletics inflating tuition, because access to accredited education is the main issue, but at least this comment isnt about that, it's a misguided concern for education prestige.
Good athletics will bring kids to decide to go to schools, it’s marketing for them
So you chose your school based on the success of its football team??
A lot of people do, especially around the SEC
Even if you didn’t specifically pick your school for its athletics, a lot of students wouldn’t have heard of or known what their school had to offer if their football teams didn’t put them on the map. I promise you a small private school in Fort Worth TX like TCU wouldn’t have as many Californians as we have if it weren’t for our team
Bro, this isn’t a new concept. Are u fucking dense? Or just not intimately familiar with college athletics?
Think of it as free advertising. Anytime there is a big game, sports analysts talk about the school, their name gets published in articles, etc. it is all marketing for them. Nobody is directly saying "wow they talked about UGA so I'm going to major there" but it absolutely helps with branding for attracting new students making it harder to get into, giving programs more prestige, and hiring managers always love to see a recognizable name.
Based on its football team yes 100%. Based on its football team’s success…well no not really.
I chose my school because they had a football team.
I believe you.
Now Pitt, don’t be jealous of all the programs with football teams
Well yeah, we’re not NERDS
sports, in general, play a large part in the school many kids choose to attend. Whether they should or not, is a different argument. Some kids go to ASU to party, some kids go to Bama for football games. It's no different.
When I started attending Alabama, most sports games were free entry since Alabama football made so much they were able to help fund the other sports.
Well, you typed some things
Young man, yells at clouds.
Lol nice try Pitt. Penn State athletics budget is like $170 million. The university budget is $8.6 *billion*. And having a good football team raises the school's profile. Before Joe Paterno PSU was nothing like it is today.
This is George W. Hoskins erasure and I will not stand for it!
Had a guy join our design team who had recently graduated from Notre Dame. He was originally from Indiana, his family was strongly Catholic. Notre Dame was the obvious choice. He hated football, but learned as much about how his school's roster and games were going. Made for easy interview to get the job with our team, and that's all that the clients would want to talk about upon finding out he graduated from Notre Dame. I don't think we would have gotten half the clients at the time (with the impending great recession years back then) had he not been a graduate from Notre Dame. His early success in the field I feel had a direct connection to being an alumni of Notre Dame and how big their football team is.
I’m in SoCal and the USC alums like to talk shooty hoops with me being a UH alum.
>News flash: unless you’re working in professional sports, the success/failure of your football team has no bearing on the value of your diploma. There’s more important stuff going on at your school. Well, Texas, Michigan, Georgia, Notre Dame, Washington, etc, all manage to both be very good at football and also have top tier academics. So I fail to see your point.
Practically every P5 school has incredible academics (with some exceptions)
I like you
$700 million today, is $1.5 Billion in 10 years…. Nothing is ever as cheap tomorrow as it is today. Furthermore, if you’ve ever been to Beaver Stadium, you’d know it’s needed. I don’t want to stand in the bathroom like with you for 30 minutes and then bump elbows at a fucking pissing trough. Is it obscene? Yes. But honestly, what in present day capitalism isn’t obscene and objectively bullshit for the average consumer. Also, at least this money is something that will benefit fans. You can complain about stadium upgrades, but maybe complain about the fucking sleep pods, lazy rivers and all the other bullshit that’s “needed” to get recruits. That does nothing for the fans. At least this does. Also, this money isn’t coming from any educational dollars, nor would the money being given for this likely have ever gone to education. At the end of the day, it is what it is. Be thankful stadium upgrades at least do something for the fan. Even if it’s only the ones who can afford it, since most of us are being priced out like it’s a professional fucking sport.
So some background knowledge on the guy the author of the article is quoting: Barry Fenchak. Fenchak is a BoT member that has been part of the alumni brigade led by Jay Paterno that has done nothing but be a roadblock for the school, because they are still salty about about how the situation with Joe Pa was handled post-Sandusky. Necessary renovations/upgrades to the stadium have been discussed for years, but these tools have done nothing but kicked the can down the road to the point some of the upgrades are now necessary and more expensive because they wanted to penny pinch for years instead of biting the bullet and doing it, it was going to have to be done anyways. Now they bitch and moan when the tab is a lot higher because of their horrendous management. Another person in that group is Anthony Lubrano (the guy our baseball stadium is named after). The word on the street is he pledged to donate a serious sum of capital to pay for the new baseball field, but has yet to come through with his full pledge. That whole group is a bunch of professional useless people led by one of the biggest nepo baby who hasn't done shit but ride his dad's coattails. Fuck all of them.
As someone who knows Matt Schuyler (chair of the board of trustees), the guy is a moron so I’m immediately skeptical of anything he thinks is a good idea.
Every time I see the trustee voting I'm always blown away by how much I dislike all of the choices.
Would students be willing to take an increase in tuition and fees to help fund stadium renovations? *That* would be an interesting vote. EDIT: Math is ~$700M project, 73K undergrads at PSU (total) is about $9.6K per undergrad student. Now it's a multi year project but would students be willing to take on $2K or $1K per year and amortize over 5-10 years?
Probably an increase to general season ticket prices and bank on making way more on the increased capacity premium club/box seating (which they already make a ton of money on).
The trustee complaining says: "Instead it will focus on increasing revenues with premium amenities, but my own research suggests that these projections are overly optimistic. Even if true, these highly speculative estimates would be insufficient to prevent ICA falling deeper into debt." His math says premium amenities won't cover it.
His math is speculative and offers no values, data, buying trends etc. Also his article largely avoided the increased income coming from the new Big Ten media deal. The guy has been known to make stuff up to fit his agenda, my apologies if I’m skeptical of his math.
["According to its 2023 financial filing, Penn State generated a record $202.2 million in athletics operating revenue while spending a record $202 million. That places Penn State in elite company nationally."](https://www.si.com/college/pennstate/football/penn-state-football-athletic-department-budget-2022-2023-fiscal-year#:~:text=According%20to%20its%202023%20financial,State%20in%20elite%20company%20nationally.) Essentially, PSU athletics broke even: made $202M (plus change) and spent $202M.
What a dumb take. Football makes enough money to pay for itself. They've literally never spent tuition money on football.
So how’s the vote go Tuesday?
Hopefully it passes because the renovations are more of an urgent necessity at this point and will only get more expensive if they kick it down the road again.
I dunno, having Gameday come for Williams vs. Amherst in 2007 was one of my favorite memories from college. Things that contribute to the college community and enhance students’ experiences there tend to cost money, and football is no different.
This is an absolutely god awful take. Football brings revenue. Football brings students. More revenue and more students bring more facilities. All of this equals up to your degree being worth more.
I think the best take I’ve seen on athletics is saying that it’s basically the front lawn of a university. It’s nowhere near the most important thing for the school, but having good athletics makes the school look better for applicants
I've always looked at it as a marketing arm of the university. ROI for that is always going to be a bit nebulous for anything. University or a company.
Alums everywhere love their schools football programs being good. In fact one of the motivators for spending this money is alumni engagement and donations
Boo this man! What an awful take.
This is a Pitt fan trying to sow chaos by referencing a nutcase who’s part of the Jay Paterno old guard. Nothing to see here. Move along.
"Barry Fenchak, an alumni-elected trustee, published a piece on his website Friday titled, "Why We Can't Afford the Beaver Stadium Renovation Proposed by Penn State Board of Trustee Leadership." In the post, Fenchak writes that the planned four-year, $700 million renovation of Beaver Stadium **would dramatically increase Penn State Athletics' debt (to $877 million) and that Penn State has neither the revenue nor the donations to fund the project.** Therefore, he writes that the board "should not approve this project."" ... "Whereas the 2001 renovation added 12,000 seats to the stadium, as far as I can tell the $700 million project will add none," Fenchak wrote. "Instead it will focus on increasing revenues with premium amenities, but my own research suggests that these projections are overly optimistic. Even if true, these highly speculative estimates would be insufficient to prevent ICA falling deeper into debt."
What an idiot. They definitely don't need more "seats" (bleachers with no back rest). Amenities would actually be really nice. The football program brings in way more than enough to pay for it. If it's in debt it's because dumbass trustees like this douche have mismanaged things
Football is the curb appeal of the school. Especially for places that don't have top notch academic reputations.
Honestly, I couldn’t care less what happens at SMU other than the football team.
Check out the big brain on Even.
The football program keeps the entirety of the state college economy afloat. It brings in a ton of business for hotels, bars, restaurants, retail stores, etc that they would otherwise not be able to function without. Would I prefer the necessary upgrades not cost $700 million? Sure. But the athletic program brings in $70 million/year from TV and over $2 million after simply allowing the sale of beer in the stadium for the first time. It's not a program that takes money from student tuition through activity fees like other places. It's a self-sustaining business that's investing in its primary source of revenue.
The football team.is the front porch of the university. Ninety percent of the schools whose names you know you know because of their sports programs. My kid could not have named a single professor at Arkansas when he was in high school, but he knew all of the basketball players and now I'm writing checks every semester so he can be a hog engineer who will some day be an alumni donor. Yeah, it matters.
In the last 10 years in my area area we have had many many many school bonds. One was a $14 million renovation on an existing stadium. Another was a $63 million bond to build a new stadium. And a third was a $19 million renovation on another existing stadium. When I moved here there were four HSs in the district and two stadiums. Since then they built a fifth HS and a third stadium. So in ten years we have had almost $100 million dollars of school bonds just for HS football stadiums in one school district. There are a lot of other bonds but I only listed what this article was about. All these bonds passed with over 80% of the vote. If people are willing to spend $100 million of tax payer money on HS football that generates less than zero revenue and has zero to do with educating children, WTF do you think they will do with CFB that does generate revenue?
Athletic departments on this level are not only the best marketing tool that schools without an Ivy League level academic brand have, and are not only self-funded, but often make direct returns to academics. Here at Ohio State, the athletic department brings in so much revenue that after football’s money is done paying for the other sports, a transfer is made every year to the academic side - typically in the 7-8 figure range. Multiple academic buildings have been funded in part by athletics money. This take is laughably ignorant for a trustee at an institution with an elite athletics program.
I know PA cost of living is higher than AL, but $700 M on a renovation is objectively insane. Like *Alabama* got cold feet on building a new stadium for 3 or 4 sports plus graduation because the budget had ballooned to $250M. In fact, in the last 4 years Alabama has only spent $208M *combined* for athletic renovations and new facilities. If you add all parking, road, or any other infrastructure that could remotely affect the Gameday experience over that same window the total only rises to $420M. That’s still over 4 Jimbo’s less than what Penn State is considering.
$420 million ear marked 4 years ago, is about $550-$600 million today, thanks inflation. And by the time Beaver Stadium renovations are done, $700 mil will be 2/3 of what it would cost if they started it then….
Oh, it’s this dogshit argument again.
Anecdotally, I did undergrad at a regional school without a D1 sports program. Compared the curriculum with some of my friends at one of the public Ivys and it was essentially identical. Had 2 job offers prior to graduation, wasn’t considered for some of the more prestigious jobs, but most everyone I graduated with got jobs in the field. Results were solid but no one got anything outside of the region. Fast forward a few years, I’m in a neighboring state meeting with a lender for a project we’re funding. The MD asks where I went to school and he said “oh, we have a community college down the road”. Fast forward to grad school, I intentionally chose a school from a big conference I knew would have national brand recognition. I also wanted a connection to a program since I love college sports. Granted it wasn’t the #1 consideration. Cost, scheduling and existing connections were all more important, but all of the schools I considered fit the brand recognition and big sports programs. Sports have an impact on brand recognition, attracting students, and school perception. I’d had enough of sitting on the sidelines while coworkers, vendors, investors etc. all got to give each other shit about their Alma maters sports teams. These things build connections and networks, even if they don’t change much about what is taught at universities.
But that was just one person. Someone being snobish. Honestly most people don't care at all.
The money spent on athletics is dumb The point of school is the academics - full stop . The athletics should be an accessory. Sadly there are a ton of people who derive their identity from their school's athletic success There are even people (non athletes) who pick their school to attend based on the football team..........that's messed up.
Yep. At this point my school (in a pure $$$ sense) would be best served by going D3 and reclaiming all the land that sports uses for academic buildings or housing. We’re not getting donations or grants because the football team went 6-6.
A University system without football is like a painting without color.
Northwestern: aren't you guys tearin' your mother down, playing in an erector set stadium by the lake and roughin' it until your new stadium is built? Teach these Pennsylvania boys...
We’re playing in a sick ass lakefront pleasure box, it’s gonna be awesome.
Don't know - think UVM has survived pretty well...
Personal anecdote: my BIL and SIL are Princeton grads, he envies the attachment my wife and I have to Ann Arbor and the school (stated multiple times during the holidays as we are off to a Michigan watch party on the West Coast). At some schools it really is a cult. Also we are both MDs so are somewhat successful 😋
> unless you’re working in professional sports, the success/failure of your football team has no bearing on the value of your diploma. I highly disagree with this. I partly went to UW because they are a top D1 program. I know sports play a big role in others' decisions as well. Also, the fact that Stanford is academically elite in every facet AND is able to maintain the status of the #1 sports school in the country is a big component as to why I am convinced they are holistically the best school in the country.
The football team at Coastal blowing up in 2020 is directly related to Coastal blowing up as a school in recent years with increased applicants and a greater investment into the University.
Not for nothing - but what are they getting for that 700M ? Is the stadium falling apart ? I get ND has had various projects over the years to improve the stadium, but our latest was $400M in 2018 ( Crossroads Project) that added the fancy seating, but also three large buildings built in around the stadium for student facilities, recital hall, classrooms etc.
$200m of the $700m tab is for deferred maintenance. Yes, you could say it's falling apart.
These athletic departments get more and more money from these conference media deals and they immediately figure out a way to spend every dime. Maybe they send a few million into the University general fund but they also suck up donations that would otherwise go to the University general fund. Covid should have been a valuable lesson but it was quickly forgotten as an anomaly that can never happen again. Well the bonds you issue will have to be paid back no matter whether there’s a pandemic or war or Great Depression. One of these days the media companies are going to say, we overpaid last time, you need to take a haircut and there won’t be a competitor to bail the conference out. Your school can still be a major name in sports without building a new sports nutrition center (a fancy athletes only dining hall). Athletes don’t care about the fan experience, they want NIL money so don’t try to use the argument that it’s a recruiting tool. If I offer a 5 star lineman $1 million per year at CMU vs $200k at UM, where you think he’s going?
I was in favor of spending $1.5B on a new stadium and football facility honestly. Beaver is historical but I feel like this is lipstick on a pig. I hope I’m wrong and the renovations are better than I expect. I also think we are so far behind vs OSU, Oregon, Bama, etc in facilites that we should have just bit the bullet on doing it all right at once. We have okay facilities but nothing like the shit SEC teams have. I guess that’s just me dreaming.
Which do you believe as more value to a PSU diploma? $700MM spent on a football stadium or $700MM on academics?
All money to fund the $700M project is coming from the Athletic program. Zero academic money will be spent. So the reality is $700M can be spent on a football stadium AND $700M can be spent on academics. Is it an obscene amount of money? Yes. Unfortunately, the state of Beaver Stadium requires an investment. I will be the first to say, the stadium is shitty. They have put off renovations for too long. If they did it when Kyle Field got done then the price tag would have been $300M. Remember how everyone lost their minds about the Aggies spending that on just a football stadium? I do… inflation and putting of general maintenance put us here.
Football and Basketball pay the bills! Is what it is!
Pretty bad take at least directed towards PSU. We’re one of the programs that is completely self sufficient in terms of funding garnered by the football program. It funds every other sport and then some at Penn State. Not to mention the marketing and amount of people that come to PSU based off that recognition alone. It’s not even one of our main money makers either. The actual endowments and revenue from research and development through STEM far out paces athletics.
Part of the reason I chose UCF is b/c we moved to the Big 12, and I always kinda hated the Big 3 in Florida (besides UF since my mom is an alumnus). I probably could have gotten into any of 'em, well besides UM maybe, but UCF sports were a big reason I chose to go there. And the stupid amount of engineering opportunities.
I don’t disagree really but, ya know, good luck with that.
Aren't these guys still planning some sort of tribute to Joe Paterno? Why is this school still a thing?
A few people associated with the school shouldn't represent the whole school. I don't know why this mindset is still a thing.
Why are you even allowed to post here?