VTTW Board Index

Don't tell me it's numbers. It has to be more than that. Personally I think it sucks

I expect it's several things. Money, personalities, UA not wanting UAB to be successful. Basilio (and a few Bama fans) think it started here: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/05/sports/sports-people-basketball-bartow-accused-alabama-in-1991-letter.html (http://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/05/sports/sports-people-basketball-bartow-accused-alabama-in-1991-letter.html)

**Please delete this post is it's deemed too political.

Since most programs aren't self-funding, I can see how a case could be made to off athletics at most institutions, particularly taxpayer-funded ones.

This I can believe

The ones that are going to have trouble are going to be the FCS schools. With the emphasis on beefing up the schedules in the FBS, I expect that FCS schools are going to suffer. Many of those schools make a significant portion of their football budgets by playing just one FBS school each season.

I think this is a very good point, and I've often wondered why so many athletics programs still exist when they lose money every year. I wonder if there's an effect on enrollment that the school considers. Athletics are a big part of student life, and without them a smaller state school might see a decline in enrollment. I wonder if keeping the programs is actually less costly than cutting them.

Mostly political.....UAT didn't want them to successful. They nixed improvements to Legions Field.....they nixed UAB wanting a onsite stadium...they nixed the hiring of Jim Bo Fisher at UAB a few years back. Big brother syndrome.

Or, to add to this, there's enough of a positive effect on the local and state economy that it offsets being in the red in terms of direct revenue.

There is definitely an effect on enrollment at bammer.  Bammer is up to 34K and climbing...in fact I think it might be 36K this fall.  Only 22% of the students are in state.  When I asked a bammer alumnus, he said he supposed that out of state students are attracted by the success of the football program.

That is not something that I even considered when going to college, but if you just want to go and party and have a good time, I guess it's a factor.  It sure as heck doesn't help academics, at least not directly.  Although I have heard that name recognition matters when getting a job.  Bammer is already pretty well known nationally though....I seriously doubt employers hire because your alma mater won the MNC.  Well, at least not OUTSIDE of bammer.... :naughty:

I think UAB was looking down the road when college players were going to start getting more money to play. UAB is not in a big enough conference to get TV money and unless the NCAA or Alabama started supplementing the program, it was a lost cause. IMO, they are only the first program to call it quits and not the last is costs continue to soar. UAB just does not make enough for the sports arms race (indoor facility, training facility, practice field, on-campus stadium, etc.). That and the trustees doing everything to keep success down.

This is why I have always said that paying college players is going to make these little schools shut down because they are barely making it the way it is.  When you start paying players, then you start having programs that have to shut down.  Also, if you pay football players, something tells me you are going to have to pay more athletes because of title IX issues.  It is ok for the Power 5 conferences because they have the TV money that will help, but don't expect UAB to be the last college program to shut down football.