There’s no palpable way to measure how athletic success wholly impacts an institution, yet more than a third of Ohio University’s General Fee funds intercollegiate athletics.
This year, $8,793,000 — or 34 percent of students’ General Fee — is dedicated as the driving force behind Ohio Athletics for the 2012–13 academic year.
And although the rest of Athletics’ more-than-$19-million budget receives capital from a variety of revenues and the General Fund, the General Fee is its chief source of funding.
Ohio Director of Athletics Jim Schaus said he believes the backing Athletics receives is in line with the service it provides the university.
“If you only look at the spreadsheet and look at its cost, I would say it holds its weight and then some,” he said.
Of all intercollegiate sports teams, football receives the largest allocation of Athletics’ total budget, utilizing 22.1 percent. Athletics’ operating budget and some department salaries, employing 13.3 percent of the total, make up the next-largest portion.
Athletics receives 2 percent — or about $7 million— of the General Fund, which is used for student-athlete scholarships.
Schaus cited the football team’s 12 television performances this season as an example of how athletics acts as a window to the university — one many would never take the time to look through otherwise.
He said an appearance on ESPN’s main channel is worth about $900,000, and showings on the network’s other outlets are financially beneficial to a more marginal extent.
“The value of the exposure is hundreds of thousands,” he said.
Richard Vedder, a professor of economics who has been outspoken in his criticism of the Athletics budget, said that although athletics has the ability to shine a spotlight on the university, the actual impact the department might have on education and enrollment is modest.
“Athletics is over-emphasized, over-funded, and Jim Schaus, I think, is way off base in hinting that there are $8.8 million (of General Fee dollars) in benefit on this,” he said.
Vedder headed an OU survey through the Center for College Affordability and Productivity in 2011 that he said made clear that students’ top priority is not athletics.
Although he admitted it doesn’t directly apply to today’s student body, only 5.6 percent of students identified athletics as their No. 1 spending importance, according to a two-year-old Post article.
“Large university subsidies for sports that are starting to emerge as costs rise are increasingly problematic,” he said.
He also noted, however, that the debate about using student fees for athletics is not exclusive to OU.
Vedder said he is a fan of Ohio’s athletic teams and watched intently during the Bobcats’ basketball team’s Sweet 16 run in the spring.
Still, he said, the price of that success doesn’t outweigh its cost to students.
“It’s nothing personal,” Vedder said. “(Football) coach (Frank) Solich has been over for dinner and went to high school with my wife. I go to several games per year, but with my university hat on, I think Schaus’ argument essentially doesn’t hold in this case because the magnitudes are so large.”
jr992810@ohiou.edu
