Buffs lead the way.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

NYT

Long-term, this could be the start of a sea change. CU isn't some D-III liberal arts school or even an Ivy. It's a bit-time player with a serious investment in football.

wifeisafurd said:

---

the problem for those stupid two regents is that don't understand what a business model is, Football pays for everything else, including all those otherwise unfunded scholarships.

They plan to pay for hundreds of students out of their pocket? If not, a simple "no" doesn't cut it. They need a plan to achieve the lost revenue. Then again I should expect such short run thinking from 2 politicians.

---

Has it occurred to you that maybe they do understand what a business model is, but have made a value judgment that it isn't worth the human cost?

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

the problem for those stupid two regents is that don't understand what a business model is, Football pays for everything else, including all those otherwise unfunded scholarships.

They plan to pay for hundreds of students out of their pocket? If not, a simple "no" doesn't cut it. They need a plan to achieve the lost revenue. Then again I should expect such short run thinking from 2 politicians.

---

Has it occurred to you that maybe they do understand what a business model is, but have made a value judgment that it isn't worth the human cost?

---

Given that neither has held a job in the business world (one was a journalist for a short time), and are professional politicians, I don't think they even care about the business model (less could understand one), and are grandstanding for the political optics.

Moreover, to prove the point, do you see where they gave any consideration to the economics or offered an alternative for lost revenue, not to mention the cost of being booted from the conference and losing revenue share? These are people who take positions simply to advance their political career.

wifeisafurd said:

---

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

the problem for those stupid two regents is that don't understand what a business model is, Football pays for everything else, including all those otherwise unfunded scholarships.

They plan to pay for hundreds of students out of their pocket? If not, a simple "no" doesn't cut it. They need a plan to achieve the lost revenue. Then again I should expect such short run thinking from 2 politicians.

---

Has it occurred to you that maybe they do understand what a business model is, but have made a value judgment that it isn't worth the human cost?

---

Given that neither has held a job in the business world (one was a journalist for a short time), and are professional politicians, I don't think they even care about the business model (less could understand one), and are grandstanding for the political optics.

Moreover, to prove the point, do you see where they gave any consideration to the economics or offered an alternative for lost revenue, not to mention the cost of being booted from the conference and losing revenue share? These are people who take positions simply to advance their political career.

---

You haven't proven anything. You are basically saying that because the article didn't cite any evidence that they considered economics, they must not have considered it. And that because they are not business people (not sure where that came from, but let's assume that's true...), they must not be capable of understanding it. Neither of which is a particularly logical argument.

I don't think it is grandstanding to take an unpopular stance (yes, unpopular) on football. If one believes that a sport cannot be played without a significant portion of its participants leaving it with debilitating and permanent brain injury, it is immoral to continue to recruit kids to play that sport. They're a university, not a business enterprise. Factors apart from money are part of the equation.

https://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20130402/INFO/304029985/obama-proposes-100m-for-brain-mapping-project

What ever happened to this initiative? I was really excited about it, and then never noticed any other news about it.

wifeisafurd said:

---

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

the problem for those stupid two regents is that don't understand what a business model is, Football pays for everything else, including all those otherwise unfunded scholarships.

They plan to pay for hundreds of students out of their pocket? If not, a simple "no" doesn't cut it. They need a plan to achieve the lost revenue. Then again I should expect such short run thinking from 2 politicians.

---

Has it occurred to you that maybe they do understand what a business model is, but have made a value judgment that it isn't worth the human cost?

---

Given that neither has held a job in the business world (one was a journalist for a short time), and are professional politicians, I don't think they even care about the business model (less could understand one), and are grandstanding for the political optics.

Moreover, to prove the point, do you see where they gave any consideration to the economics or offered an alternative for lost revenue, not to mention the cost of being booted from the conference and losing revenue share? These are people who take positions simply to advance their political career.

---

If they are anything like politicians in California, they have already considered (and approved) the alternatives: raise tuition/fees along with taxes.