Ain't gonna happen -
I look at myself and what I spend annually on Tech athletics wise & LTAC, NO ONE is going to redirect that money to the academic side of the equation
The academic side gets the money I give them because of the athletic side - not vice-versa
So you climb the food chain to the P5's to those that have NO ties to the institution except through the sports programs and it will be even a larger effect
It may not be the right thing, but it is what it is
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
I'm not saying that any donations go to academics, I was only limiting it to the PROFITS from REVENUE (ticket sales, TV, etc), not from donations. Very few programs have net profits (Texas is best), but those profits should be not just wasted on athletics (arms race of better coaching salaries, facilities, uniforms, etc.). We don't need to have schools close like the Soviets
In summary, if you have donations for athletics, apply them to the athletic budget. If you have a profit (not including donations), then apply some to academics, scholarships, research, and the endowment.
The problem.
ESPN signs 15-year deal with SEC (2008)
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/n...ory?id=3553033
The Southeastern Conference has signed a 15-year deal with ESPN reportedly worth more than $2 billion to televise sporting events, including football and men's and women's basketball.
PD and DFM, what are y'all paying for? I'm paying for a good athletic program, with decent facilities and competitive programs. I also want the athletic program to benefit the academic side (awareness is a big one). While I enjoy some of our improvements, some that I've heard of in other programs are unnecessary, and I believe it is moronic for a program to use their endowment as collateral to get ahead (USL)
It honestly depends on who you talk to, like most things, conservatism includes a wide scope of beliefs. Many conservatives appreciate the hard, factual advances we've achieved through medicine and engineering. However, many conservatives don't give as much credence to the more theoretically applied timeline archaeologists, paleontologists, biologists, historians, and physicists employ to attempt to explain "existence". Such theories are really not necessary to function.
I believe I'm 75-90% conservative and 25-10% liberal, in the US mainstream definition. I'm quite skeptical, as most scientists should be. And I know that we, as subjective beings, will never know the objective truth. At the end of the day, all knowledge is belief