The nutty Michigan coverage isn't so much about Harbaugh as it is a signal to the Big Ten that Fox wants to party.
Article in Chicago Tribune says that there will no longer be a 6 month grace period after students finish school. Will earn interest on loans even if in Grad school. If I read the article correctly, will only be applicable to loans taken out from starting tomorrow and on (or July 2014?)
I'm not sure on how this affects this years grad or current grad students.
Mod Edit: Relevant topic to many on the board, but too much politics. That's why we can't have nice things. [zl]
Michigan leads the teams playing for 2012 BCS Bowl Championships in the percentage of total revenue not derived from football. Only ~1% of Michigan's total campus revenue is derived from football.
By these figures, football accounted for 14% of LSU's gross income...
Alabama... earned a final mark of 11%...
Other schools which had football teams playing in elite bowl games had far lower marks: These include Clemson (5%), West Virginia (3%) Wisconsin (2%) and Michigan (1%).
This shows how well-rounded Michigan is when compared to its football competitors and is evidence of the breadth of opportunities available at the University of Michigan. With its diverse revenue, Michigan is able to fund a top football education as well as top extra-curricular and research programs. This diversity strengthens the university, allowing it to take more risk, as a negative outcome from any single program (spread-offense anyone?) will not have a large impact on the university as a whole.
Michigan also leads the Wall Street Journal's study group in total revenue with over $6 billion in total campus revenue (Revenue Spreadsheet). (edit: Link not working, click source and then scroll down and click on second graphic on left) For laughs, rank the list accoring to football share rank and find the SEC schools. SEC speed = football is all we do.
These facts are excellent evidence of the true strength of the University of Michigan, its diversity. It is a football school while simultaneously being a research institution and an excellent educator. If a football recruit wants to get the full college experience and have as many opportunities as possible, the University of Michigan is the premier institute in the country.
More from the Big10 on Delany's proposal to add the "laundry money" back into athletic scholarships:
The biggest revelation is that it would apply to all student athletes, not just revenue sports.
The PAC-12 announced an enormous media deal this week that’s worth a reported $22 million per school per year. The Big 10 and SEC have monster TV deals in place that virtually ensure profitability for their member athletic departments for the near future. That’s life on the top of the FBS division, and there’s no doubt that football is the key driver of both revenue and expenses.
This diary is about the other half. The financial straights of the lower tier of FBS, specifically the MAC, Sun Belt, and post Boise State WAC are also largely driven by football. Unfortunately for them, the train has fallen off of a cliff instead of chugging towards the land of monocles and gold toilets. These schools are reduced to selling home games to artificially increase attendance numbers and playing body bag games to pad revenue.
Specifically, this is about Eastern Michigan football and EMU athletics. What, if any, benefits does the school derive and what are the costs associated with those benefits? Why do they field teams at all on the D-1 level?
College sports have a purpose. The NCAA says that its purpose and the larger point of intercollegiate athletics is to promote things like sportsmanship, integrity, the pursuit of athletic and academic excellence, respect and leadership. These are all good things to promote and I believe athletics can help cultivate those qualities. However, a good club program or the intramural programs that most universities run with student fees can accomplish the same goals and provide much greater access than D-1 athletics. Thus, in my mind, schools must derive some other benefit from D-1 athletics than simply promoting certain values in its athletes—of which Eastern has about 465.
Every FBS school should probably ask itself what benefits it derives from big-time football. It’s a shockingly expensive undertaking, can give the school tons of press (both good and bad), can generate enormous revenue, and can be a significant drain on student funds. It’s easy for the University of Michigan to make a cost-benefit analysis for its football team and athletic department in general. It generates many millions of dollars for the athletic department and is a self-sustaining enterprise. Sure, it’s attached to the school, but it costs the school nothing. The Board of Regents never needs to worry about eliminating a student program to fund football.
Eastern Michigan has a tougher time. Last year, EMU’s athletic expenses were $24.64 million, a whopping 9.2% of the school's General Fund. For a little perspective, there are about 23000 students enrolled at EMU, of which about 2% are intercollegiate athletes. They use their share of the 90.8% of the budget spent on items other than athletics, but 9.2% of the budget is used exclusively to support athletics. Sure, some of that $24 million comes out of TV deals, sponsorship, and ticket sales, but the database shows that to be only about $1.7 million. Everything else comes from the General Fund in some way. By the way, tuition went up 3.8% in 2009-10 at EMU.
However, EMU could still justify athletics if the non-monetary benefits made athletics worthwhile for the school. I think sports teams at U of M make valuable contributions to the student body. Aside from pride, I firmly believe that the Michigan diaspora—I see shirts everywhere—stays engaged with the school in large part due to the visibility of the sports teams. This has benefits for job seeking grads, networking alums, and helps donations to the school. Maybe this is the case at EMU too, but it doesn’t help too much. They only received about $3 million in gifts last year. Even if all of those were directly the result of athletics, there are still almost $20 million that the school gives each year to athletics. People don’t go to games and EMU athletics aren’t on TV unless they’re getting drilling by a Big 10 team in September.
The world has changed. Regardless of why (and let’s not get into it), Michigan doesn’t have money to waste. Why is a public university spending almost 10% of their General Fund on entities that only directly benefit 2% of the student body and don’t produce discernable benefits for the student body, alumni base, or school? Michigan and Michigan State are different. Their athletic departments aren’t a choice of resource allocation for the school. If the department closes, the money disappears. If EMU closes its athletic department, there are over $20 million, by my count, that can be reallocated to improving education, facilities, or even lowering tuition.
Why can’t EMU de-emphasize athletics and expand its club offerings? They could bus to CMU, WMU, Northern Michigan, Toledo, etc and play at a rented high school field on Saturdays. The players could work out at a student gym instead of a team gym. The same could be done with other sports. Just as many students could play, but for millions less. If I was a Regent, I’d ask why.
Not sure how well received this will be but right now BYU is the underdog in their matchup with Gonzaga tomorrow. I don't think I've ever seen an 11 seed be favored in an 11-3 matchup. I realize Gonzaga has played well recently but all their wins in the regular season were against joke teams. I'm trying to figure out if the Big East was just vastly overrated, st. johns had a poor showing yesterday or if its actually possible that the Zags should be favored tomorrow. At +110 for BYU I feel confident betting on that game. Thoughts?