Quad City Times Editorial: Iowa and its millionaire football coaches

There are a lot of interesting items in that article. The U of I athletic budget is usually in the black but maybe it was in the red for one year because of big expenditures on football facilities. I dont know but I know the Ath Dept is known for being in the black and being self -funded and not using taxpayer money.

Secondly, a lot of us think that Gov. Branstad isnt worth a penny of what he makes. Just take his forced decision for taking Medicaid operations out of the state govt's hands and putting it in the hands of private companies that will pay high salaries, just the same thing the editorial is bemoaning. Not only that but these private medicaid companies are already being charged with cutting off payments and services to people who used to routinely have them.

Yes, coaches salaries are crazy and I dont think Saban and Ferentz, etc are worth this much money but if TV is willing to pump in millions/billions of $$$ into the sport then the salaries will keep getting higher.

I would like to know their source for how much student money goes to athletics? Anyone got the dope on that item?
 
uihawk82 said:
There are a lot of interesting items in that article. The U of I athletic budget is usually in the black but maybe it was in the red for one year because of big expenditures on football facilities. I dont know but I know the Ath Dept is known for being in the black and being self -funded and not using taxpayer money.

Secondly, a lot of us think that Gov. Branstad isnt worth a penny of what he makes. Just take his forced decision for taking Medicaid operations out of the state govt's hands and putting it in the hands of private companies that will pay high salaries, just the same thing the editorial is bemoaning. Not only that but these private medicaid companies are already being charged with cutting off payments and services to people who used to routinely have them.

Yes, coaches salaries are crazy and I dont think Saban and Ferentz, etc are worth this much money but if TV is willing to pump in millions/billions of $$$ into the sport then the salaries will keep getting higher.

I would like to know their source for how much student money goes to athletics? Anyone got the dope on that item?
Click to expand...


Yea, the state of Iowa has just financially sucked under Brandstad's terms!! o_O The state, AS A WHOLE, has been very healthy with him as governor, IMO. He may have his driver speed between gigs on occasion, but who the heck cares.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Look at the states and keep in mind how they typically vote.Just sayin'.

http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/FR16-OVERALL-Map-v8_0.jpg
Click to expand...

MH, I know where you are going with that, but you leave out a big part of the equation. The states that are the most fiscally solid are also very commodities driven in economics with oil and corn. Those states fair very well on the amount of federal dollars they receive back v what they pay in. The midwest states besides getting a lot of USDA dollars also benefited TREMENDOUSLY from ethanol subsidies which led to very well off farmers.

I hope you realized the agricultural and oil industry boom is OVER. Iowa's economy is in serious potential trouble and hardly anyone sees it coming. Though we have fewer farmers than a generation ago, the economy is very dependent on subsidies. Ironically the states at the bottom of the fiscal list also receive the least pay back from DC.

That said, could it be the football salaries are a bit like CEO pay and corporate profits?

CEO pay and corporate profits have shot off like a rocket. Family income has been stagnant to lower for the last 70 years. The Iowa economy isn't dependent on football. Still, one has to wonder if the fatness will be it's downfall. It is getting harder and harder for families to take kids to games due to cost. Those are future fans. Cost is part of the equation for declining attendance.

TV revenue will eventually decline if there aren't fans. Millennials just aren't as big of fans as are boomers and xers. Younger generations aren't as likely to sit down and watch a game, nor are they watching TV in general.

As per your comment about votes, Iowa is an anomaly. It has a very large conservative and liberal voter base as seen by election and Iowa Supreme Court rulings.
 
Joshbrown said:
You read these posts and quickly realize which side of the aisle doesn't understand economics. I guess that side is too busy becoming experts in the grievance industry.
Click to expand...

At least one of us works professionally in industry as an economist and has taught college econ, But don't let facts get in your way after all this is only a message board. Btw, who made the grievance comment concerning politics. Your implication was that liberals are stupid. I've never voted for liberal in my life. And Iowa is very divided. Why do you think Pres candidates spend so much time tromping around with farmers. As a state it can go either way and is always very very close.
 
HawkGold said:
At least one of us works professionally in industry as an economist and has taught college econ, But don't let facts get in your way after all this is only a message board. Btw, who made the grievance comment concerning politics. Your implication was that liberals are stupid. I've never voted for liberal in my life. And Iowa is very divided. Why do you think Pres candidates spend so much time tromping around with farmers. As a state it can go either way and is always very very close.
Click to expand...

You might want to reread the underlined part of your reply.
 
There are no controls on spending at the University of Iowa. They just spent $400 million on a 150 bed children's hospital when they were already one of the better children's hospitals in Iowa. It makes little sense. Football is the tip of the iceberg in Iowa City
 
"And how much was spent on the average literature major at University of Iowa? Just $20,000."

That's the real ripoff.
 
HawkGold said:
TV revenue will eventually decline if there aren't fans. Millennials just aren't as big of fans as are boomers and xers. Younger generations aren't as likely to sit down and watch a game, nor are they watching TV in general.

s.
Click to expand...
Link?
I don't buy that comment at all. Not for a second. Yeah, maybe families don't gather around the transistor radio or read about the game in the big peach, but fandom has grown, not shrunk.
 
uihawk82 said:
There are a lot of interesting items in that article. The U of I athletic budget is usually in the black but maybe it was in the red for one year because of big expenditures on football facilities. I dont know but I know the Ath Dept is known for being in the black and being self -funded and not using taxpayer money.

Secondly, a lot of us think that Gov. Branstad isnt worth a penny of what he makes. Just take his forced decision for taking Medicaid operations out of the state govt's hands and putting it in the hands of private companies that will pay high salaries, just the same thing the editorial is bemoaning. Not only that but these private medicaid companies are already being charged with cutting off payments and services to people who used to routinely have them.

Yes, coaches salaries are crazy and I dont think Saban and Ferentz, etc are worth this much money but if TV is willing to pump in millions/billions of $$$ into the sport then the salaries will keep getting higher.

I would like to know their source for how much student money goes to athletics? Anyone got the dope on that item?
Click to expand...


I thought posts with political stuff in them were verboten here?
 
HawkGold said:
Don't let facts get in your way. https://infogr.am/iowa_football_attendance_trend_by_season

That's a 4% decline. Happening most everywhere.
Click to expand...
Your "fact" that fandom is down is that people attend fewer games?
I go to the store less, doesn't mean I spend less. As a world renowned economist you should understand that just because individual channels are down, that doesn't mean total consumption is down.

The "fact" is that college football continues to grow in popularity. Maybe that will bubble, but a slight drop in physical attendance has nothing to do with level of fandom.
 
My guess is that fan attendance at Kinnick for 2016 will be better than 2014 and 2015. While attendance figures are "facts", they need to be put in context. The team's lack of success and the overall stagnation, real or perceived, of the program were substantial factors in attendance being down. I read that the student section was sold out for this year. Why did that happen this year, but not in the past few years? The Hawks win their home games, and go to the BT Championship game again, my guess is that attendance will be good again next year, too. Does that mean that college football is and will continue to be on the rise in popularity? In general, don't know, but in the case of Iowa,Yes.
 
homes said:
My guess is that fan attendance at Kinnick for 2016 will be better than 2014 and 2015. While attendance figures are "facts", they need to be put in context. The team's lack of success and the overall stagnation, real or perceived, of the program were substantial factors in attendance being down. I read that the student section was sold out for this year. Why did that happen this year, but not in the past few years? The Hawks win their home games, and go to the BT Championship game again, my guess is that attendance will be good again next year, too. Does that mean that college football is and will continue to be on the rise in popularity? In general, don't know, but in the case of Iowa,Yes.
Click to expand...
That just means that college kids today are much better fans than college kids way back 3 years ago.
 
Duke said:
The ill informed editorial writers fail to realize that football pays for everything in Iowa Athletics. Iowa fans in
the Quad cities should cancel this rag.



http://qctimes.com/news/opinion/edi...cle_906d2edc-e29c-5b94-a18b-004da1772c08.html
Click to expand...
Why do editors for the NY Times or WSJ make more money than those for the Quad City Times? It's not a slam on those at the Quad City Times, it's just reality. Same for college football coaches. Is it out of whack? A rational argument can be made so, but those salaries are also rational, negotiated agreements between two represented parties.
 
HawkGold said:
MH, I know where you are going with that, but you leave out a big part of the equation. The states that are the most fiscally solid are also very commodities driven in economics with oil and corn. The midwest states besides getting a lot of USDA dollars also benefited TREMENDOUSLY from ethanol subsidies which led to very well off farmers.

I hope you realized the agricultural and oil industry boom is OVER. Iowa's economy is in serious potential trouble and hardly anyone sees it coming. Though we have fewer farmers than a generation ago, the economy is very dependent on subsidies. Ironically the states at the bottom of the fiscal list also receive the least pay back from DC.

That said, could it be the football salaries are a bit like CEO pay and corporate profits?

CEO pay and corporate profits have shot off like a rocket. Family income has been stagnant to lower for the last 70 years. The Iowa economy isn't dependent on football. Still, one has to wonder if the fatness will be it's downfall. It is getting harder and harder for families to take kids to games due to cost. Those are future fans. Cost is part of the equation for declining attendance.

TV revenue will eventually decline if there aren't fans. Millennials just aren't as big of fans as are boomers and xers. Younger generations aren't as likely to sit down and watch a game, nor are they watching TV in general.

As per your comment about votes, Iowa is an anomaly. It has a very large conservative and liberal voter base as seen by election and Iowa Supreme Court rulings.
Click to expand...

I agree the current oil boom is over. However there will be another one(as there has been before). Oil and gas is a cyclical business. Been in it since 1972. More booms and busts than I can count. Better save your money in the boom because there will be a bust.
 
theboat said:
Your "fact" that fandom is down is that people attend fewer games?
I go to the store less, doesn't mean I spend less. As a world renowned economist you should understand that just because individual channels are down, that doesn't mean total consumption is down.

The "fact" is that college football continues to grow in popularity. Maybe that will bubble, but a slight drop in physical attendance has nothing to do with level of fandom.
Click to expand...

Ship, pls demonstrate with your keen mind how college football is growing in popularity? I happen to like football.
The numbers say overall they don't. TV contracts get ridiculously bigger, yet viewership is down. Last years National Championship was down 23 percent over the year before. The Rose Bowl, compare the 70s through 90s to now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top