No, you ignored what I wrote earlier.
No, I disagreed with what you wrote earlier. That's different
When Presidents don't fully reimburse the athletic deficits, ADs have gone around their backs to trustees and alumni, forcing the issue.
Then the board, and or the influential alumni are the relevant decision makers. And they are the ones who are deciding that there is value in athletics.
Let's only talk about UConn. There are budget cuts coming. The President is so upset she goes to the media. The academic side will certainly be degraded. She's making public stink about it. She's risking p...ing off the people who pay her. Why? Because she knows the deficit is an intenable burden.
I have a different characterization of that event. I think Maric, though undeniably brilliant in her field, is an inexperienced negotiator who utilized a point in a very tone deaf and poorly timed manner. Back to the reoccurring theme she was immediately corrected by, wait for it, the relevant decision makers.
( For what it's worth, the point she made is a valid one in that the state of Connecticut pays the university of Connecticut who's relevant decision makers have decided to take a portion of that payment and support athletics, and as a consequence a portion of the state of Connecticut's funds getting returned to, wait for it again, the state of Connecticut. All that does is move the accounting loss from the CDRA's to the athletic department. Effectively just masking the CDRA's consistent in ability to turn a profit.)
You keep talking about the president who have decided funding sports is in the best interest of the university, yet you don't even notice UConn's president who publicly notes the school might not honor its Hartford sports contracts if the state cuts funding to the academic side.
Wait, you just made the argument over several posts that the president was irrelevant. I disagree, but at least you should be consistent if that's your position. In any event I know that our president did not propose eliminating athletics, rather she proposed eliminating what is unarguably a poor lease deal for the university.
This tells me the new President is actually very concerned with the athletic deficit and the academic deficit, and that she's not afraid to cause a ruckus when it comes to the damaging impact of one deficit on the other.
Lol, I love how you switch back and forth between university presidents being a powerless stooges and crusaders for right as you find it convenient. As noted above, the situation described "tells me" that we have an inexperienced negotiator echoing some of her what she has been told is potential leverage in an in efficient, untimely, and novice like manner. It's OK she'll learn to let professionals do the talking for her.