The House of Blue

Football and men's basketball pay for everything. Football is the key element in every college athletic program. If football isn't making it then there is no money for the other sports. I expect to see a lot more of this as economic pressures grow and force AD's to make business based decisions. UK could be there in a year if they don't pay attention.

A committment to winning. Having a successful football program will eventually bring back those other sports.

I agree.

How could Maryland let James Franklin get away and then hire Randy Edsel. Boneheaded move of the year by an athletic director. I've got a feeling that move is going to be trumped by Mitch failing to make a move.

They've had a terrible first year under Edsel and I have no doubt the Terp fans have kept a close eye on the revival going on at Vandy.

There is no mens gymnastics team, but I'm sure they balanced the cuts to comply with title IX.

As far as costs, our tennis facility is worth several million dollars, and we're getting ready to put a couple of million more into it I believe. I would be all for UK making similar cuts in order to fund football more. They claim that they won't do it because "it's all about the student athlete", which I find to be bogus. If that were the case, then there wouldn't be multi-million television deals, shoe contracts, and required donations for seats. Intramurals are all about the student athlete, Div 1 NCAA sports are all about the dollar.

Love the fact that Men's Lacrosse was kept. I know they are a traditional power but my son plays and it is a great sport

UK Men's Soccer ------> Door

That sounds like a lot of money to me, but maybe you drive a solid gold rocket car.

I drive a Chinese fake Honda copy 110cc motorbike which cost me a 150 bucks :P

For a university though, tuition is what? $30,000? Thats the money of 17 kids for a tennis program and I'm sure it brings in some money from attendance and things like that for itself?

Something like Soccer, Mens/Womens where you would have probably (im guessing) 25 scholarships and etc might be worth cutting, isn't tennis one of our better performing programs? I personally wouldnt cut anything but if I had to it wouldnt be tennis....

Running a sport at the D1 level is incredibly expensive. It's not only about scholarships. Take UK Men's Soccer for example:

24 Players that divide a little over nine scholarships. Doesn't sound like a lot but you also have to add...

- 3 Full time coaches, salary + benefits
- 2 Graduate Assistants
- 24 sets of practice gear(sweatsuits, warm ups, tennis shoes, ect.)
- 24 sets of equipment (cleats, shin gaurds, gym bags, ect.)
- 48 sets of uniforms (Home and Road)
- 2 Trainers
- Health Insurance for the entire team
- Travel for thirty on road trips. Hotel, Air Fare, Ground Transportation. This season that includes a trip to San Francisco.
- Food for thirty on road trips
- Training table for 24
- International Recruiting budget. There are players from Mexico, Brazil, and England on the roster

Add in the fact that they have to play in Conference USA which means a wider travel range for road games than if the SEC competed in Men's Soccer.

Actually, that's the big thing for me. UK has an athletic portfolio of 21 sports. The SEC competes in 18. Men's soccer isn't part of the SEC profile and to me it doesn't make sense to keep it as a varsity sport in UK's case.

Now admittedly, UK isn't exactly Little Sisters of the Poor. According to the Sports Business Journal UK has an athletic budget of $83 Million in FY 2012. That's well inside the top twenty. Maryland is about $21 Million behind UK. In fact, UK would have the largest budget of the entire ACC.

Here's some perspective...using FY2012 numbers UK's budget would be/is...

Tops in the ACC and Big East
Third in the Big 12...11...10...9...?
Fourth in the Pac-12
Fifth in the Big 10
Seventh in the SEC

My point is if you downgrade Men's Soccer to a club sport with UK's budget there's absolutely zero excuse to avoid investing in more money in the football program. Especially when the TV Deals and bowl tie ins are going to grow now that the conference has grown by two members.

So you would have UK competing in Mens BBall and Football and nothing else? That'll be a turn off for students, especially out of state, it will give people less events to go to and none of them unique, it will do away with many Americans beloved baseball, it will give the likes of the campus newspapers and local news much less to cover and therefore less exposure for the university, even minor teams like rifle get covered to some degree.

It's just incredibly short sighted; my degree is in Sports Journalism, one of the big reasons for choosing it in my decision was that it had an incredible range of sports I might get the chance to cover while I was there. Coming from the UK I had no idea how big UK basketball is or what SEC football is all about, but I saw things like rifle and volleyball and diving and thought now isnt that cool! Should we do away with all the departments at the university who dont bring in enough tuition money to break even?

It's an institution of higher learning, not a pro team. I know we all want more money to be invested in UK football but I think killing other sports would absolutely be the wrong way to go about it!

I'm with cobbycobb. I also majored in journalism at UK and covered UK sports for 15 years. Aside from basketball and football, the only other games I went to were baseball games. Maybe 5 of them, total. Btw, QLW, could you point me to the volleyball, soccer, tennis and track & field boards?