Post by williamtsherman on Oct 24, 2018 15:04:20 GMT -6
Sorry to get into basketball here, but this is on the theme of the general cost effectiveness of sports.
You know, if the BSU decision makers just failed to pick the right coaches, I could maybe cut them some slack and hope for better choices in the future. Picking a successful coach can be difficult. But BSU decision makers continue to extend the contracts of coaches who have demonstrated they don't have what it takes to bring the bball program up to a investment worthy level. They've done that for three out of the last four coaches ( the other coach being an out-and-out, one year fiasco). The decision makers have thus demonstrated that they are basically OK with the mediocre MAC also-ran level of program. Well, the mediocre MAC also-ran level is not a cost effective investment of the money.
So, I've reluctantly concluded I can't defend the basketball expenditure, and no longer try. Note, however, that the situation is different with football. It's much worse. First, the yearly money loss is much higher. Second, with football, there is no conceivable way...no matter how effectively it is handled....that football is anything other than a huge wasteful money pit. The NIU example demonstrates this. They reached the highest possible height, they lost money doing so, and the long-term effect has been nil.