I don't expect anything from them. They'll gladly take anything they are given. However, if they were an honorable program, they would not accept tax payer money when they can fully sustain themselves and still have all of their petty amenities.
There are a lot of places my tax money goes that I'm less then enthusiastic about. The university of Alabama ain't one of them.
Maybe, if there was some tangible benefit to the student athletes, but a tax payer funded waterfall? Really?
You don't know that. You're assuming such. Subsidies are defined in several different ways and getting money from taxpayers is just one of them. There's also different institutional support areas as well as student fees. Another area that has to be considered is how athletic departments categorize different revenues. Tennessee pulls 4 million out of their cash reserve this past season. Where did that money originate? They didn't disclose that. Through an FOIA I'm sure the source is available. Was their athletic department subsidized last year? Yes. What did they report? 1 million in student fees. They report breaking even even though they had to pull that money out of the University's cash reserves. Schools have academic personnel that receive their salaries from the academic side of their University's even though those individuals work specifically with athletes. It's considered a subsidies in some school's reports—but not all. If a kid is on a half of a scholarship for a sport like track, applies for and receives a federal work study job, that money is considered a subsidy. Is there something wrong with that? No. Not in the least. Bringing this a little closer to home. The state of Louisiana has a state funded lottery scholarship that is separate from athletic scholarships but kids who play sports qualify for and receive those monies. Is their educational cost being subsidized? Sure it is. Is it being labeled as a subsidy for the athletic department? No. Is that money being sent to the athletic department, then in turn being sent back to the academic side? No. Should it? Again, no. There's no reason for it to be. But, there is no denying the fact that a kid who receives money from a state funded lottery to pay for their tuition, books, rent, whatever...even though it's not being funneled through the athletic department those athletes are still having their education subsidized by the state. Do you believe these schools who report receiving zero subsidies don't have kids apply for and receive things like the Pell Grant? Federal dollars, going to athletes, to subsidize their educational...wait a minute. Subsidize? The state of Alabama doesn't have such a scholarship (lottery) available. But, there are monies sent from the academic side to the athletic side for areas like Title IX sports. Institutional support categorized as a subsidy. I haven't heard of, or seen, anything that leads me to believe every school has to report everything by the same standard. So, the exact source of a subsidy isn't something that you can definitely assert, "that's taxpayer money paying for..." What's being lost in this whole thread is the point you have schools reporting subsidies, and then you have schools who are self-supporting. A big distinction. It's a shell game, for lack of a better expression. UA, as example, receives over 5 million in 2012 from the institutional side and then turns around and donates 1 million back for faculty support, over 3 million in monies received from licensing fees... Some schools have their athletic departments pay rent to the University for use of facilities. Why? It's the way they chose to shuffle monies. If that athletic department categorizes money received as a subsidy, but they are paying rent on a basketball facility back to the University...again, shell game. The fact some think this is a big deal when schools are clearly making money and contributing back to the academic side is beyond me. Hell, if I were to sit here and try to make a big deal about the LSU mascot is being tended for by students who are on government funded scholarships I'd look like a fool. Trying to make an issue out of subsidies on schools where money is being shuffled back and forth falls into that category as well. Mountains and mole-hills. Much ado about nothing. You choose the right cliche'.
