(01-10-2012 10:25 AM)slappywhite Wrote:  .


now they drop football and try to fully fund all of the intercolliegate sports at etsu. they take the million football was losing and spread it out among the other sports and an additional 500k to help all become fully funded over time. so in summary, instead of fully funding 1 sport (football) and overall losing 1 million, they spend an additional 500K and FULLY fund ALL the sports, build some on campus facilities, pay coaches and staff better salaries, and to try to help the overall student athlete experience at etsu. I have no problems with that.

.

How?? How did they go from losing a million dollars to be able to spending 500k more the next year without football? Does that mean
they lost 1.5 million that year? That is the math that doesn't add up.
How can they "take" the money they were losing and add more? Makes no sense.
Stanton said it was taking 500,000 away from academics to support football so does that mean it was/is okay to have
taken at least that much away to NOT support football year?
I am not talking about increases in budgets over an 8 year period and how they have grown. I am talking 1 year to the next.
1 year with football(losing a million a year) to the next spending 500k more without football.
We can't afford football, it is losing to much money!! Great now we can spend even MORE money without it. WTF?