I know, but 10 state-funded football programs in a state the size of Louisiana seems excessive. Especially expensive FBS programs at Louisiana Monroe, La Tech, and the University of Lafayette, Louisiana. Those teams were championship competitors back in old Division II but today they are expensive rent-a-wins in the FBS. We have no junior college football at all. Louisiana Universities took $700 million in budget cuts under Jindal, but no football program was downsized one bit.
UAB has been steadily growing over the years delivering billions in financial impact to the Birmingham area. UAB is also one of state's largest employers. The University has been nationally recognized for it's medical programs and continues to attract students and medical professionals across the country and internationally. With that kind of growth, reach and increasing organization of alumni who are working in high paying medical careers there is an opportunity to secure enough funding to grow the athletic program. At it's current size (and state of the program) the university does not present a threat to the recruiting efforts of the "beloved Tide" down the road. Especially now that Saban is there. But ... what if the Blazer program grew, matured, and started becoming able to attract better staff, better players and establish better facilities? Then there could be three programs in this state competing for players which would create additional challenges for the other Universities and more specifically UA which sits only 50 miles down the road. If UAB had been freed years ago who knows where this program would be today. I understand that we are dealing with unknowns and what if's, but how would anyone know if never given the opportunity? That, to me, is the issue. Alabama suffocated the program and this started a long time ago ensuring that there would be no potential threat. Don't forget that Birmingham is home to some very strong High School football programs. What if UAB was able to start keeping some of that talent here? It's not like the University of Alabama is absent of this type of approach in their history. The beloved Bear was known for being a little underhanded including bringing in players that he never intended to start just so they would not compete against his program. It was legal at the time, but legal doesn't make it right. There is such a blind, do anything it takes commitment to the Tide here. It is absolutely everything. More than any place I have been. They simply don't care what the cost or impact is to anyone else as long as they can stay on top ... including crushing the football program in one of their universities.
@Tiger420 Some of the things here may be what you've been told, but they're off by quite a large margin. Yes, the UA's medical school in Birmingham does bring in money but it certainly isn't in the billions and it has no relevance when it comes to football. Since the move from the club level to DIII that program has been a financial sinkhole. A decade ago it was only losing 6-7 million per year. Now, it's almost triple that amount. A football program is intended to bring financial stability to an athletic department—not be its biggest deficit and certainly not dwarf the other programs in terms of how much money it's losing. Stranglehold is an interesting choice of words. Are you referring to the BOT refusing to fund a 7 million dollar indoor facility? Or, the absurd notion that was proposed that UAB be allowed to build an 88 million dollar on campus facility? I find the idea of allowing the football program to continue on the chance it might be competitive some day down the road to be irresponsible. Estimates I've seen put their football program losing over 17 million per year now. Let's just assume, for this conversations sake, it's only 10 million. If it takes 10 years for them to be competitive is that worth losing 100 million of state taxpayers money? You're a state resident. How do you feel about such a gamble with your tax dollars? (I read, but can't recall, the percentage of the athletic departments budget that was subsidized...gut says it was around 75%.) UofSC showed a profit of under 250K last fiscal year and look what they have to offer, what conference they are in, and the success they've had over the last few years. Using their revenue as a baseline, that would mean it would take how many years to recoup the monies? It's my opinion if they wanted to continue football they need to drop down out of D1 play. But, they've got their eyes on that money that comes from CUSA basketball teams and don't want to give that up. (Even though if there was an audit they'd likely lose their membership due to inflated attendance numbers among other things.) It's not a pretty picture but it is what it is. I'm sure it won't be the last story we hear of this kind. The good thing is those players who want to continue playing can transfer and play immediately.
Louisiana has more non Power 5 conference D1 rent-a-win teams than California. Where is the sense of that?
