Name an academic program on any college campus that results in a net gain? Pacific cancelled Football in 1991 and lost students. Not only lost students but lost male students. So now they are bringing it back and increasing gross revenue by 2 million. The bugdet for football is probably well under 400,000. (have your priced an engineering school?) I think it is absurd that athletics need to show a profit in order to be considered useful. How many english departments are profitable?

Your ignoring the forest because of all you see are the trees. Pacific gained at least a million, balanced there gender equity for very little cost. The offer a product and over a hundred students are willing to pay. Not sure where the big deception is.

So I guess I was wondering how many english departments make money nation wide?
I hope that you understand that my point is that Colleges rarely make money from any program. However most people agree that the various programs are useful in terms of providing an education. To conclude that because a program does not make money therefore it is deceptive or fiscally absurd, misses the point that the choice to have a football team is not neutral choice. It is a positive net gain. As for *only*, *but for* and balderdash, the bottom line is Pacific reduced gender imbalance, and increased net revenue.

Now if you say it is better to lower standards vs. adding a program that is a value judgment. How low do you go?

I will step foot on campus for the first time since attending a football game in 1991. I have purchased season tickets even though I live 500 miles away and will not be able to go to many games. I am a professional and donate a great deal of my time to coaching HS football. Over the last 20 years, I have helped a number of high achieving student-athlete s with choosing schools where they are able to continue to play football. These kids are not D-I type kids, they are student first, football is a bonus. My school, Pacific was not an option. Now it is. This story is about money, and the administration of PU has made some excellent decisions of late with program expansions, and this football decision is a great one. An expensive, small, private college adding those numbers to their enrollment in this economy is remarkable!

Harvard and Yale have continuously played football since 1875. Pacific, had it not dropped its program in 1991, would have completed its "100th" year in 1992 (16 years after "the game" was adopted and formally integrated into the "university experience" of two of world's leading universities (e.g., Harvard undergrad ranked #1; Yale is ranked #3 (see U.S. World & News Report and QS World University Rankings) (among others, I'll add). Notably, none of the Ivy League universities, like Pacific, offer athletic scholarships, merit admission only (with some assistance based on financial need)!

Let's not forget that educational programs, as a whole "almost never" generate revunue to pay for themselves ( by the way, the football program at larger universities are expected to fund (directly and indirectly, through donations) the other "non revenue" programs (i.e., soccer, track, et al) - as pointed out, just a few are successful enough to pay for "all" programs.

The reality is that, wether public or private, all colleges and universities are dependent on federal, state, and local tax based revenues. Private contributors and endowments, as well as federal and corporate grants, typically pick the remainder of an education institution's operating expenses.

Ever been to the Univ. of Notre Dame on game day? Does anyone seriously think that the english or engineering departments (sans the many student athletes from "all" sports (although football typcially provides the largest segment) that are enrolled in these fine curriculums) could create and establish the strong "academic" and "athletic" traditions that fine American institution has established in the middle of Indiana's northern cornfields?

Academics is the priority of the mission, but the strategy for getting that mission fulfilled should include the opportunity to have the full college and university student-athlete experience, which optimally includes fall saturdays filled with football and other college sporting activies. Isn't that, after all, the full liberal arts and science education philosophy?

Two of my all time favorite football quotes seem appropro here. First, "It's kind of hard to rally around a math class." - Bear Bryant Alabama); and, "A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall" - Frank Leahy (Notre Dame).

When Fordham University dropped its FB program (which it later wisely reinstated after a significant drop in enrollment - endowment), Vince Lombardi (who, by the way taught Latin, physics and chemistry before becoming a full time coach) reportedly said, "Fordham is is a school without a soul."

I wouldn't go that far in describing Pacific that way these past 19 years, but I can tell you that a significant segment of successful alumni felt the school lost touch with it's "99 year" history of providing PU students with the full college experience when faculty seized the opportunity to make fall Saturday's at Pacific U. match the rest of Forest Grove's sleepy Saturday downtown demeanor.

So, instead of casting criticims at one of any university's rare "revenue generating" activities, I propose that we just say "Congrats" to Pacific and hope that the University community and those associated with the team enjoy having "another" competitive function to draw folks back to the PU campus this fall after all these many years!

Go Boxers!!!

TD