Nobody is happy about college athletics. That unhappiness goes far beyond won-lost records. Most agree that college athletics is out of control. It often feels like what we’ve got is a bunch of semi-pro teams operating on a campus that also has academic classes. The athletic tail is wagging the academic dog.
It was good news that UNC President Peter Hans announced that the University Board of Governors was going to conduct an investigation into college sports. “The college athletics model has never been more broken and yet more popular,” Hans said.
While the UNC System could well have delved into issues like Name, Image, Likeness pay for athletes, the transfer portal system, eligibility requirements, whether student athletes should be required
to attend classes, booster club influence, licensing royalties, conference affiliations or NCAA revenue sharing distributions of $20.5 million per Division 1 school, they wisely chose to involve themselves in something they can do something about - how tax dollars, tuition payments and other institutional funds are being funneled into athletics departments.
The issue is timely and important. Not to focus on just one school but we have data from UNC Chapel Hill revealing that in 2024 UNC spent $188 million on athletics, an increase of more than 35% over two years. During that same period revenues to athletics was only $173 million. The only programs generating a profit were football and men’s basketball. Third graders can do this math. There was a $15 million deficit and a significant part of that deficit resulted from paying huge salaries to coaches (Belichick’s $10 million annual pay, for example.) We strongly suspect other schools also have deficits.
In 1956, when Bill Friday became president of the then three-school university system (NC State, UNC Chapel Hill, Woman’s College) he expressed concerns over the threats athletics posed over the academic missions of colleges in his inaugural remarks. He repeated those concerns vehemently and frequently the rest of his life, acknowledging he was fighting a losing battle.
UNC system institutions (and all colleges) need to ask hard questions about the NCAA. If Friday were still alive, he would likely advocate that UNC schools drop out of this organization that has proved inept and unwilling to work in the best interests of academics, the athletes and the institutions. Serious concerns of NCAA decision making have been raised for decades and around 1996 college presidents removed leadership from athletic directors and took control of the NCAA. Some of its decisions since have been shaped by court decisions, but most are driven by television networks. If we want to point a finger of blame, today’s NCAA chaos is the fault of the presidents of the institutions.
Obviously, the UNC Board of Governors cannot fix the NCAA alone, but they can make a serious statement about the role of athletics and how it should impact our universities.
Let us begin by confessing that we love following our college teams. We are avid fans. We also recognize that college athletics is an economic boost of an estimated $1.5 billion per year to our state. Sports teams encourage philanthropy to our institutions and attract students to attend our schools. But it behooves those who govern these state-supported institutions of higher learning to ask how much of the money provided them by the state is being diverted to athletics and whether it is justified.
And not just state and institutional funds but also funds from students. UNC System data reveals that a full-time student pays, on average, $2,407 per year in student fees, $765 of which is directed to athletics. Should students who don’t play sports or attend events subsidize them? If so, to what extent?
Football and basketball are the sports that bring in the most revenue. Should non-revenue sports get more institutional money than those that produce revenue? Further, obviously most of the money distributed from the NCAA to Division 1 comes from TV revenue sharing. Should Power 4 conference schools get more or less institutional money? How about those in the Group of 6?
But the larger questions that needs answering is how important is athletics to the overall mission of the university? And can they remain competitive in athletics without sacrificing the academic mission? Just how much in tax dollars and institutional support should the state’s citizens funnel into athletic departments? And can universities survive without athletics?
Amateur college athletics is clearly out of control, and we would hope university system leaders could make some sensible reforms. But if the UNC President and Board of Governors are not willing to take controversial, perhaps unpopular stands and make genuine changes, it might be best if they didn’t waste a lot of time and money or raise expectations.
We wish them well.
Tom Campbell is a Hall of Fame North Carolina broadcaster and columnist who has covered North Carolina public policy issues since 1965. Contact him at tomcamp@ncspin.com.
This article originally appeared on Wilmington StarNews: UNC schools jeopardize academics with athletics spending | Opinion
