Wilfork Named in Miami Booster Scandal (Well-Corroborated Allegations)

[FirstAndGoal]

This is from the 2007 2008 season. This is revenue generated. I'm sure it's higher now.

Rank School Total Revenue Conference 1st Texas $120,288,370 Big 12 2nd Ohio State $117,953,712 Big Ten 3rd Florida $106,030,895 Southeastern Conference 4th Michigan $99,027,105 Big Ten 5th Wisconsin $93,452,334 Big Ten 6th Penn State $91,570,233 Big Ten 7th Auburn $89,305,326 Southeastern Conference 8th Alabama $88,869,810 Southeastern Conference 9th Tennessee $88,719,798 Southeastern Conference 10th Oklahoma State $88,554,438 Big 12 11th Kansas $86,009,257 Big 12 12th Louisiana State $84,183,362 Southeastern Conference 13th Georgia $84,020,180 Southeastern Conference 14th Notre Dame $83,352,439 Independent 15th Iowa $81,148,310 Big Ten 16th Michigan State $77,738,746 Big Ten 17th Oklahoma $77,098,009 Big 12 18th Stanford $76,661,466 Pac-10 19th University of Southern California $76,409,919 Pac-10 20th Nebraska $75,492,884 Big 12 21st Texas A&M $74,781,640 Big 12 22nd Kentucky $71,186,184 Southeastern Conference 23rd Duke $67,820,335 ACC 24th South Carolina $66,545,953 Southeastern Conference 25th UCLA $66,088,264 Pac-10 26th Virginia $65,400,485 ACC 27th Arkansas $64,197,470 Southeastern Conference 28th California $63,884,710 Pac-10 29th Minnesota $63,782,454 Big Ten 30th Purdue $62,093,614 Big Ten 31st North Carolina–Chapel Hill $61,263,269 ACC 32nd Boston College $61,203,340 ACC 33rd Washington $60,729,016 Pac-10 34th Clemson $59,126,212 ACC 35th Illinois $57,167,843 Big Ten 36th Oregon $56,623,902 Pac-10 37th Virginia Tech $56,029,172 ACC 38th Indiana $54,839,398 Big Ten 39th Connecticut $54,721,742 Big East 40th West Virginia $54,262,716 Big East 41st Maryland $54,171,741 ACC 42nd Arizona State $53,479,441 Pac-10 43rd Colorado $52,631,896 Big 12 44th Louisville $52,203,604 Big East 45th Rutgers $50,181,300 Big East 46th Missouri $49,113,786 Big 12 47th Kansas State $48,160,113 Big 12 48th Oregon State $47,185,827 Pac-10 49th Georgia Tech $47,126,247 ACC 50th Arizona $46,988,400 Pac-10 51st Miami (Fla.) $46,849,990 ACC 52nd Vanderbilt $45,521,855 Southeastern Conference 53rd Florida State $45,414,953 ACC 54th Syracuse $44,702,831 Big East 55th North Carolina State $44,553,795 ACC 56th Baylor $44,151,763 Big 12 57th Texas Christian University $43,439,777 Mountain West 58th Texas Tech $42,844,855 Big 12 59th Northwestern $41,835,733 Big Ten 60th Wake Forest $39,961,624 ACC 61st Pittsburgh $39,741,621 Big East 62nd Washington State $39,621,059 Pac-10 63rd Iowa State $38,642,013 Big 12 64th BYU $36,695,623 Mountain West 65th Mississippi $34,769,709 Southeastern Conference 66th USF $34,727,263 Big East 67th Cincinnati $33,886,561 Big East 68th Memphis $33,393,717 Conference USA 69th SMU $33,031,503 Conference USA 70th Hawaii $33,012,865 Western Athletic Conference 71st UNLV $32,796,515 Mountain West 72nd San Diego State $31,697,560 Mountain West 73rd Houston $30,856,264 Conference USA 74th Air Force Academy $30,604,249 Mountain West 75th Mississippi State $30,440,090 Southeastern Conference 76th East Carolina $29,268,128 Conference USA 77th New Mexico $28,806,308 Mountain West 78th UCF $28,775,770 Conference USA 79th Temple $27,478,056 Mid-American Conference 80th Utah $26,949,005 Mountain West 81st Rice $26,767,228 Conference USA 82nd Fresno State $26,273,405 Western Athletic Conference 83rd Tulsa $25,797,664 Conference USA 84th New Mexico State $25,065,502 Western Athletic Conference 85th Wyoming $23,717,482 Mountain West 86th Miami (Ohio) $23,263,940 Mid-American Conference 87th UTEP $23,182,621 Conference USA 88th Colorado State $22,093,683 Mountain West 89th Boise State $21,777,002 Western Athletic Conference 90th UAB $21,566,166 Conference USA 91st Central Michigan $21,493,640 Mid-American Conference 92nd Marshall $21,340,076 Conference USA 93rd Nevada $21,057,972 Western Athletic Conference 94th Ohio $20,448,176 Mid-American Conference 95th Florida International $20,230,655 Sun Belt Conference 96th Tulane $20,029,935 Conference USA 97th Western Kentucky $19,957,909 Independent 98th Eastern Michigan $19,341,287 Mid-American Conference 99th Northern Illinois $19,199,427 Mid-American Conference 100th Western Michigan $19,190,254 Mid-American Conference 101st Buffalo $19,080,151 Mid-American Conference 102nd Kent State $18,891,133 Mid-American Conference 103rd San Jose State $18,318,325 Western Athletic Conference 104th Toledo $18,127,253 Mid-American Conference 105th Bowling Green $18,087,524 Mid-American Conference 106th Akron $17,942,424 Mid-American Conference 107th Ball State $17,427,728 Mid-American Conference 108th Middle Tennessee State $17,254,577 Sun Belt Conference 109th North Texas $15,762,952 Sun Belt Conference 110th Florida Atlantic $14,751,549 Sun Belt Conference 111th Southern Miss $14,472,618 Conference USA 112th Utah State $13,205,337 Western Athletic Conference 113th Troy $13,134,964 Sun Belt Conference 114th Idaho $12,896,488 Western Athletic Conference 115th Louisiana Tech $12,465,865 Western Athletic Conference 116th Louisiana-Lafayette $11,134,598 Sun Belt Conference 117th Arkansas State $10,456,754 Sun Belt Conference 118th Louisiana-Monroe $7,733,035 Sun Belt Conference

 

[Haley]

If schools paid for sports athletes, they would have to pay every single participant in every sport. Legally they would not be able to limit payments to just "Men's Football" for obvious reasons.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Yeah, I've been doing some looking and I'm calling that "federal law" false until I see something. I've even looked at the tax codes for college athletics and it states that "other" school programs are often funded.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

What federal law is that? There's no law as far as I know. I tried looking it up and couldn't find one at all. In fact, I'm 99% sure that foot ball income generated from my school paid for a dorm.

Yep. It's a controversial topic. So controversial that the topic has gone to the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

Yeah, I've been doing some looking and I'm calling that "federal law" false until I see something. I've even looked at the tax codes for college athletics and it states that "other" school programs are often funded.

I think as long as the University receives public money from the Government, they have to abide by Title 9.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Yep. It's a controversial topic. So controversial that the topic has gone to the Supreme Court of the United States.

I'm not talking about paying for players though and neither is he as far as I know. He's stating that income generated from sports programs has to fund other sports programs if I'm reading him correctly. That isn't true as far as I know and I've been digging pretty hard to find it.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Also upstarter, where in Title 9 is that? can you pull up the statement because I read it and don't see what you're talking about. Title 9 is a discrimination law.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

I'm not talking about paying for players though and neither is he as far as I know. He's stating that income generated from sports programs has to fund other sports programs if I'm reading him correctly. That isn't true as far as I know and I've been digging pretty hard to find it.

I'm not talking about that either. I'm talking about Title 9 and the fact that Universities are forced to take the money (gained by their football or/and bb programs) and fund ridiculous sports like shooting, row boat, swimming etc.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

I think as long as the University receives public money from the Government, they have to abide by Title 9.

Nope, show me in Title 9. You can't discriminate if you get federal funds...

 

[NinjaZX6R]

Also upstarter, where in Title 9 is that? can you pull up the statement because I read it and don't see what you're talking about. Title 9 is a discrimination law.

Title IX Frequently Asked Questions - NCAA.org

 

[FirstAndGoal]

BTW, Title 9 is now called Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act

It's a discrimination law..that's it.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Title IX Frequently Asked Questions - NCAA.org

Again, where does it say that all sports revenue has to be spent of sports.... It's about discriminating mens and women's sports.... It just says you have to fund both.

I have to fund my kids sports too, that doesn't mean that I give every cent I make to their sports.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

Again, where does it say that all sports revenue has to be spent of sports.... It's about discriminating mens and women's sports.... It just says you have to fund both.

I have to fund my kids sports too, that doesn't mean that I give every cent I make to their sports.

My argument is that b/c of Title 9, schools are forced by the NCAA and the fed gov, to spend some of the money to non profit, often loss making sports (like shooting, boating, etc). That's it.

 

[upstater1]

What federal law is that? There's no law as far as I know. I tried looking it up and couldn't find one at all. In fact, I'm 99% sure that foot ball income generated from my school paid for a dorm.

If football income paid for a dorm, you go to a school that's playing one giant shell game.

I'd like to see proof of football income paying for a dorm.

Let's talk about the gold standard, U. Texas, one of the 13 schools making a profit on sports. Last year it was $6 million in the black. But again, those numbers don't include the kick-in from the academic side. U. Texas football has incurred over $250 million in debt over the last decade. That debt is being serviced by the university.

Don't get me wrong, it's great that this much money is being generated by sports at UT, but the money goes to sports, and when you account for the debt, include the profit, basically the university isn't earning anything.

 

[upstater1]

Nope, show me in Title 9. You can't discriminate if you get federal funds...

The law doesn't get into the nitty gritty. The problem that arises is twofold.

One, the NCAA bylaws require schools in div. 1 football to participate in a certain number of div. 1 sports. As well, big conferences require participation in Olympic sports. So, when federal law says you can't discriminate, AND you're required to fund a certain number of sports per NCAA and conference rules, you're effectively taking all the profit generated from some sports and applying it to others.

Remember, there are a lot of football scholarships. You need 6 women's softball teams to equal one men's football team.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

The law doesn't get into the nitty gritty. The problem that arises is twofold.

One, the NCAA bylaws require schools in div. 1 football to participate in a certain number of div. 1 sports. As well, big conferences require participation in Olympic sports. So, when federal law says you can't discriminate, AND you're required to fund a certain number of sports per NCAA and conference rules, you're effectively taking all the profit generated from some sports and applying it to others.

Remember, there are a lot of football scholarships. You need 6 women's softball teams to equal one men's football team.

Would you like me to pull it up from Thomas? It says nothing about that.
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php

It lists all laws, their state, bills entered, and any amendments.

I'm going to just say you are mistaken.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

If football income paid for a dorm, you go to a school that's playing one giant shell game.

I'd like to see proof of football income paying for a dorm.

Let's talk about the gold standard, U. Texas, one of the 13 schools making a profit on sports. Last year it was $6 million in the black. But again, those numbers don't include the kick-in from the academic side. U. Texas football has incurred over $250 million in debt over the last decade. That debt is being serviced by the university.

Don't get me wrong, it's great that this much money is being generated by sports at UT, but the money goes to sports, and when you account for the debt, include the profit, basically the university isn't earning anything.

I asked to see the law first.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

My argument is that b/c of Title 9, schools are forced by the NCAA and the fed gov, to spend some of the money to non profit, often loss making sports (like shooting, boating, etc). That's it.

Yes, but he's saying all. Once you get done funding whatever sports are needed, they can smoke crack with the money if they want to do that. They might not have a job for long but I see nothing that makes the claim that they have to spend it all.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

also, the Title 9 act only states that if you're going to field a men's team, you've got to be willing to field a woman's team and spend sufficient funds so they can compete at that level..

You don't have to spend equal money...just fund them fully. If you spend 20 million on football, that doesn't mean you have to spend 20 million on girls softball. You just have to fund them fully and sufficiently.

Here are the guidelines.

1. Whether the selection of sports and levels of competition effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of members of both sexes
2. The provision of equipment and supplies;
3. Scheduling of games and practice time;
4. Travel and per diem allowance;
5. Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring on mathematics only;
6. Assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors;
7. Provision of locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities;
8. Provision of medical and training facilities and services;
9. Provision of housing and dining facilities and services;
10. Publicity.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

BTW, I'm not trying to rag on anyone. I'm just trying to prevent misinformation. If I'm proven otherwise, I'm okay with that...It's nothing personal.