Submitted by Thomas Nephew (not verified) on December 1, 2008 - 1:07pm.
Right now the first link ("new report from...")just leads to the (not very helpful or on point) graphic displayed in the post, though a 2d one ("The NCAA report documents...") leads to the report itself.
We talked about this over Thanksgiving; thanks for an informative post about the topic!
It would be helpful to put these budgets in some context, e.g., the overall budget of the schools -- is this comparable to US "defense spending" (ie, significant) or US "earmark" spending (ie, not really significant)? The NCAA report shows that the answer is arguably "in between", but closer to "earmark" levels -- around 5% of total institutional budget (p.19), regardless of school type (big time football powerhouse or not). The shortfalls described might also be compared to athletic budgets as a whole. That's probably in the report somewhere, too, but I don't have more time to find it right now!
Clearer link to report needed
Right now the first link ("new report from...")just leads to the (not very helpful or on point) graphic displayed in the post, though a 2d one ("The NCAA report documents...") leads to the report itself.
We talked about this over Thanksgiving; thanks for an informative post about the topic!
It would be helpful to put these budgets in some context, e.g., the overall budget of the schools -- is this comparable to US "defense spending" (ie, significant) or US "earmark" spending (ie, not really significant)? The NCAA report shows that the answer is arguably "in between", but closer to "earmark" levels -- around 5% of total institutional budget (p.19), regardless of school type (big time football powerhouse or not). The shortfalls described might also be compared to athletic budgets as a whole. That's probably in the report somewhere, too, but I don't have more time to find it right now!
Thanks again.