PonyFans.com

seems like they roll this article out about the same time every year. With the grant-in-aid being journaled as an expense, it's no wonder SMU's AD has a higher indebtedness than the other.

that would be alright if they would allocate to revenue all the free commercials for SMU everytime SMU's athletic programs are mentioned during TV broadcasts especially this year. What makes SMU different from Trinity or Austin College?

On a completely unrelated note, anyone know why they raised donation requirements for season tickets?

I also wonder if all those SMU Cox ads on the Ticket are included in this.

Again, the professors think that if there were no football, they would all have solar powered Segways. Nothing can be further from the truth. They will be cutting budgets, not adding to them.

And tuition is far and away the biggest "cost." The tuition "cost" of the the each recruiting class exceeds June Jones' salary. And if those kids didn't get those scholarships, there would certainly be clammoring for scholarships for a different set of kids. I don't see how that would save any money.

A college Athletic Department should be evaluated as a running commercial for your university and alumni outreach program. SMU's program-especially this year-does a better job of that than the rest of the university combined.

nothing more than the annual wailing from folks with a limited view of the University, and a VERY set agenda...

Daily Compost puts this out each year about this time, under the guise of 'news' of the University, but very much to stir what little stink is possible for readership. Watch for a Spanish-teaching adjunct to rail at the lack of equity and obvious 'injustice'.

Newspapers have little or nothing to do with the news...they are about advertising revenue, readership.

And for people that use "fund accounting methods of "non-profits"...no basic cost accounting criteria is attempted.

Stallion wrote:A college Athletic Department should be evaluated as a running commercial for your university and alumni outreach program. SMU's program-especially this year-does a better job of that than the rest of the university combined.

My understanding is that SMU applications this year are up considerably largely based on success of the football team. Stallion is right that athletics are important for student recruiting particularly for the private colleges.

An article to nowhere. If all the institutions want to create some uniform cap, good luck. Meanwhile the athletic department is key to SMU branding. As much as has been done in the last generation to improve SMU and the recognition some of the schools within the university have received, athletics make a continuing impression on the constituency. Not the time to dial back.

perhaps an equally valid question should be raised, using the same criteria...

Just how much does the Daily Campus cost the university?

Not just applications (which I believe are up 25%), but SMU is one of the few schools where donations in this economic evironment are also up; and of course, the school was able to push through its third increase in tuition and fees in as many years. Let's be honest, this improvement didn't occur because of the successes in anthropology, economics or English departments, but the perception through ahtletic success that the school is finally getting its act together and is on the move. It is a more attractive university.

Fully costed, most major departments lose money. Could we exist without a foreign language department (dont' answer that)? Math? English? No! of course not. Last time I looked Dedman lost money. I don't believe Dedman College as an entity "makes money" today. Without the income from our endowment, and annual gifts, the university taken as a whole, doesn't "make money"!

Futhermore, scholarships given to athletes is transferred to the acedemic departments at the full rate of tuition and fees. Give up athletic scholarships and the deficits of these departments increase even more (unless non-scholarship students are found to replace them).

Ironically, I have yet to see a college where the student paper isn't subsidized--including the Daily Campus (just what is their subscription rate?)!

The problem with athletics is two fold. First, we have our own fundraising activities and revenue stream. So the atheltic department gets no perceived credit from the income of the general endowment fund or annual non-restrictive giving. Rather the depaertment is "stealing" the money to cover losses. Many truely believe that that money raised for the university is soley for acedemics. I beleive that people that give to the school are giving to the entire university, athletics included. Yet when the athletic department uses income from the general endowment, the professors of the various teaching departments view that money as "theirs", not the entire university. Conversely, Gerry Ford didn't make his generous contribution to our stadium with the view it only helped the athletic department, he saw it as gift benefiting the entire university. Finally, many simply don't get it and they never will, that is they can't relate athletic success with success in the genral fundraising of the university as a whole. They simply can't be team players--which probably limits their career opportunities to the shelter of acedemia rather than the real world.

RGV Pony wrote: it's no wonder SMU's AD has a higher indebtedness than the other.

Ah. Enter Madeleine Pickens......

checking the above link to the article, it has obviously hit a nerve...the reporter (Steven R. Thompson) states that several students (named) had a problem having their student fees support an area of such a 'great deficit'...although there is a question as to how great a 'deficit' there is.

looking at the 'comments' section, there is the usual sound of crickets chirping...not one response.

Where is the outrage? Virtually nowhere, because athletics (as Stallion noted) act as a great advertisement for the University, and an eventual long-term sources of revenue through new students, merchandising (something woefully lacking in market), and interest in fans finally attending an event on campus.

rant off, but this would be even less an issue at some of the other 'big brother' institutions of our state.