morris buttermaker

Zips football only draws 5000 more per game than Stanford Squash.... mens basketball only 2600 more. Those Stanford sports also have produced 27 Olympic medals

Stanford whacks 11 sports

Be like Toledo?.. they are broke too. They get $21 million from the school and students. Thats not good business. ...regardless of what you put on the field.

What universities have done for the last 30 years is the same thing people do with credit cards.. they buy and pay for stuff they can't afford -- the available credit is the only reason most NCAA D1 coaches get paid what they do. 90% never were worth what they were paid. The market was artificial. Athletics is a business -- OSU can pay what they want... Akron can't-- and neither can or should most universities. The party is over . The market for most coaches is one that stupid administrators and AD's created on credit-- not the merits of coaches.

Based on what?... based on the fact that they all run programs that lose money. Just because colleges are going broke paying coaches $300,000 - $700,000 to coach teams in front of 1,800 - 4,000 fans doesn't mean they are worth it. The market is broken. You want to be a coach? well you better coach a program that has some value, or take salary that is more in line with what you do (coaching teams that nobody will pay to watch).. don't want to coach a MAC team for $200,000/yr?... find something else to do. Colleges have overpaid for years.

IMO most MAC BB and Football coaches should be paid in the $150-$200K range.

FBS scholarships are all full rides.

I would expect any football reduction not to be in terms of scholarship numbers, but the cost of attendance $... but thats my guess

The non revenue sports are a drain because of football.. if you cut football or scale back considerably, it allows you some wiggle room on Title IX .. I allows you to defund most non revenue sports.. if you cut 20 scholarships from football, it allows you to defund the some women's sports that are funded. The back asswords thinking on baseball was that it would be privately funded -- great, except that privately funded athletic scholarships need to be matched on the women's side... so unless the baseball scholarship funding ALSO included women's scholarships -- it is smoke an mirrors-- it's costing you $ on the women's side. You can't afford to leave the MAC?... you will go broke trying to stay in it.The UA makes bad decisions on bad decisions.. they should have cut their losses. They pay coaches based on what others pay - not what they can afford. If any of you ran your house or business that way, your wife would divorce you and your company would be out of business.

Once you cut the scholarships on football it allows you to cut more sports (title IX) and defund more... you saw what getting rid of 3 teams did today... The rest of the MAC will follow -- its just math. none of their programs are sustainable

Im sure Title IX plays into it... but Im fairly certain you need to maintain the full compliment of scholarships in FBS... that is why I think its important to drop to FCS (85 vs FCS where you can set your number not to exceed 63).. then you can go to say 50, and drop some other sports.. you can sponsor sports and not fund them, which is what the University should be moving towards. at D1 once in FCS I think the D1 requirements are 14 sports

Fear the Roo?.... Think Bigger.?...nah just go with ..."2020 still living beyond our means"

$4.4 should have been trimmed long ago--- it hardly seems enough now

Regardless of how the baseball scholarships are funded, they go against the needed scholarships on the women's side to satisfy title IX.. the decision to reinstate baseball was mind blowing for an athletic dept the bleeds cash

if Lacrosse is non scholarship, they will need to fund it now (title IX)..it is a cheap women's sport, and is needed to offset the FB numbers... you then defund it as the FB count goes down