That would depend entirely on what size the intended audience. If sports at Ohio University appeals to 50,000 people (no idea, just using a number), then my value is 1/50,000 of the athletic budget, which is what, $28 million or so? By that measure, I'm doing MORE than my share. A lot more.

God help the free-riding fans of the Super Bowl, the World Series, the World Cup, the Stanley Cup, the Olympics, the Triple Crown...

The term I've used in the past is subsidized. Student fees greatly subsidize the cost of our tickets to attend events. If there are 12,000 paying fans that show up for football and say 4,000 paying fans for basketball, with an average ticket price of $10 that's $720,000 for football and $380,000 in revenue. Without student fees we'd either be deeply in dept or ticket prices would have to go up 5 or 10 fold. Free ride or subsidize, I appreciate the help but I don't think it's sustainable.

Robert, I generally get what you're saying. But it really doesn't make sense to say that it doesn't matter if the pub pays for itself....Since, as in about any activity, why put the resources to it if the return is less than the resources returned? Isn't that more or less the definition of 'waste'?

We shouldn't do the pub...or should do pub differently...if the pub that we're doing doesn't more or less pay for itself.

Because it's somebody else's money(students)that you're spending. Lots of people don't care how you spend money if it's somebody else's.

As long as the university is able to get students who are willing to pay the fees which support the sports, maybe it's not a big deal to the university. I'm not saying this is anything close to ethical or whatever, but it happens all the time. I agree it's waste if nobody is really getting their money's worth out of their investment(fees)

You make a VERY large assumption that everyone here isn't contributing to those subsidies that you mention.

I started posting on this board as a high school student prior to ever enrolling at Ohio. I've posted on this board as: a prospective student, student paying fees, student attending games, alumni paying student loans, alumni donating to OBC, alumni buying season tickets, alumni contributing to OBC capital projects and MULTIPLE combinations of the proceeding.

I would argue that your stance is "close-minded." Your argument is examining this issue as "Ohio athletics." If you think this is about "Ohio athletics" and not "Ohio University" I respect your opinion as little as The Situation respects the opinion of Monroe Slavin. "Ohio Athletics" is the window to "Ohio University."

You say this like nothing's changed and nothing will change. The college costs are spiraling. Student debt is a national issue. Woody Hayes made $43,000 a year in 1978. Today, sports coaches are the highest-paid public employees in every state. The D1 sports environment is rapidly changing with P5 autonomy, cost of attendance, cable cord-cutting, conference realignment and a slew of other factors changing the landscape every year.

Change is coming because the growth in costs is not sustainable.

So ...like every other conversation ....we are gonna bring race in. As long as we are there....I have been floating the idea of contributions and charitable giving to Boy's Club, YMCA and other organizations I am a board member or supporter. Amongst my peer groups where I may often be the only white man in the group, My responses have ranged from a raised eyebrow and a "who me?" look to outright...."man, y'all are the rich ones I got nuttin left to give" from a guy who is a close friend with a rising business, a brand new Escalade and 3 cell phones,(main one, business one and "girlfriend phone"). Suffice to say ...my take on this is becoming...if we are becoming the minority and are relying on rising social classes to become the benevolents rather than the recipients we are in a heap of trouble. The "I gots mines, y'all got to fend for yourselves" is a problem that goes against the social responsibilities I was raised to believe in... regardless of color, creed or persuasion it has always been incumbent on us to do the right thing. Just not seeing it these days.

THe student fees issue is here to stay and no moral argument is going to stem the tide in my lifetime.

It's a deadly combo that we are facing and I think the long-term consequences are dire: Rising student fees that support athletics and declining student attendance at the events they are signaling with their absence that they don't support. Not a good mix.

So in essence, students are buying their tickets but aren't going to the game. Until students stop buying tickets, I don't see where the panic comes from.

Robert I disagree that the students are "buying" their tickets. The students are systematically being "charged" for their tickets thru the student fees, they aren't given a choice whether to "buy" or not. How many students do you think would choose to "opt-out" if given the choice whether to subsidize athletics thru their fees? I'm fearful that would be a big number of students that would be saying no thanks.

I know that my two kids who attended OU for either graduate or undergraduate school would have opted out and if they had wanted to go to a game they would have bought a ticket on a one game basis.

Which brings up and interesting question, do graduate students general fees also fund athletics?

That's a good question.