This was mentioned on the pod, but I didn’t see it discussed here.
I find this interesting, and it won’t shock me if other schools follow the model. I know Neal and Chase took the angle that it feels wrong to essentially charge students to support the athletic department.
I have a slightly different take. Every good chancellor/president talks about athletics as the front door to the university. It’s one of the biggest marketing tools the school has. It contributes to enrollment. It contributes to alumni donations, even to the academic side of the house. It’s maybe the biggest marketing tool a university has.
I’ve always said that athletic department P&Ls vastly understate the value of the athletic department. This, to me, is ASU recognizing that and choosing to fund athletics based on its value to the broader university mission.
For that reason I don’t have a problem with it, but I’m curious what others think. I fully expect a model where athletic departments are subsidized by universities to become the norm.
I find this interesting, and it won’t shock me if other schools follow the model. I know Neal and Chase took the angle that it feels wrong to essentially charge students to support the athletic department.
I have a slightly different take. Every good chancellor/president talks about athletics as the front door to the university. It’s one of the biggest marketing tools the school has. It contributes to enrollment. It contributes to alumni donations, even to the academic side of the house. It’s maybe the biggest marketing tool a university has.
I’ve always said that athletic department P&Ls vastly understate the value of the athletic department. This, to me, is ASU recognizing that and choosing to fund athletics based on its value to the broader university mission.
For that reason I don’t have a problem with it, but I’m curious what others think. I fully expect a model where athletic departments are subsidized by universities to become the norm.
