The business of college athletics

I can’t help coming back to LSU’s athletic director’s comments about ending the money flow from his department to the school, not so much because of the money itself as instead because of the open way he discussed what he sees as the real world relationship between the two.

Yesterday’s post contained a comment in which he referred to the athletic department as “an auxiliary” to the university.  If the subtext isn’t clear enough, try this quote:

“This needs to be run as an enterprise,” Woodward said. “Recently you’ve seen how much we’ve invested in our student-athletes — unlimited meals, cost of attendance, you name it. It’s covered in a positive fashion from our TV contracts and generous donors. But (the growth of overall cost is) not ending.”  [Emphasis added.]

This isn’t someone who sees the role of an athletics department as being subservient to a school’s larger academic mission purpose.  Those student-athletes, our student-athletes”, are part of keeping a functioning operation profitable.  They’re with the school, but not of it.

I’d say this is radical stuff, but, let’s face it, all Woodward is really doing is saying the quiet parts out loud.  You’re kidding yourself if you believe otherwise.  He should make for a fun witness in the next antitrust lawsuit.


Filed under College Football, It's Just Bidness

7 responses to “The business of college athletics

  1. Hogbody Spradlin

    He hath droppeth the fig leaf.


  2. “This needs to be run as an enterprise.”

    This statement should be exactly why the tax-exempt status should be removed from every one of these organizations, the conferences, and the NCAA.

    If the NCAA, the P5 conferences, and their member organizations want an antitrust exemption, then they should give up their tax status.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. ATL Dawg

    These athletic associations/departments (including the UGA AA) are professional sports organizations that don’t pay their players and are loosely affiliated with their schools.