Rhode Island cutting 4 sports due to $12 million deficit

Will this become the standard around the nation?
How will this affect schools in the Big East (or in other conferences)?

USF has had to cut $15 million due to budget cuts, but it shouldn't affect sports much. I'm guessing that most (if not all) Big East schools will be fine as well.

I'm guessing that budget cuts around the nation might cause a few athletic departments to consider dropping football. Over on the MAC board there is a discussion about a deficit in Ohio's athletic department. I doubt they will consider dropping football, but you have to figure that if they are in trouble, other smaller schools are struggling as well.

Two more things:
1. I forgot that Rutgers cut 6 sports last year. So budget deficits have already affected one Big East school.
2. This quote from the A-10 board describes the situation really well:
"URI and UMass can't afford D1AA football, can't afford to eliminate it, and can't afford to go 1A. It's really hurts the rest of athletics."

BullsFanatic Wrote:Two more things:
1. I forgot that Rutgers cut 6 sports last year. So budget deficits have already affected one Big East school.
2. This quote from the A-10 board describes the situation really well:
"URI and UMass can't afford D1AA football, can't afford to eliminate it, and can't afford to go 1A. It's really hurts the rest of athletics."

Much of the sport cuts at Rutgers...most of those $$$$ went straight to the Football Program.

Rutgers invests in football but cuts other sports
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2667334

BullsFanatic Wrote:Two more things:
1. I forgot that Rutgers cut 6 sports last year. So budget deficits have already affected one Big East school.
2. This quote from the A-10 board describes the situation really well:
"URI and UMass can't afford D1AA football, can't afford to eliminate it, and can't afford to go 1A. It's really hurts the rest of athletics."

Really, that quote should put a lot to rest about UMass's ability to move to I-A. Its been publicly known that UMass is really strapped and moving up to I-A football isn't going to make the problem go away, it would make it a lot worse.

KnightLight Wrote:

BullsFanatic Wrote:Two more things:
1. I forgot that Rutgers cut 6 sports last year. So budget deficits have already affected one Big East school.
2. This quote from the A-10 board describes the situation really well:
"URI and UMass can't afford D1AA football, can't afford to eliminate it, and can't afford to go 1A. It's really hurts the rest of athletics."

Much of the sport cuts at Rutgers...most of those $$$$ went straight to the Football Program.

Rutgers invests in football but cuts other sports
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2667334

No it didn't...

4 sports are pretty irrelevent

KnightLight Wrote:

BullsFanatic Wrote:Two more things:
1. I forgot that Rutgers cut 6 sports last year. So budget deficits have already affected one Big East school.
2. This quote from the A-10 board describes the situation really well:
"URI and UMass can't afford D1AA football, can't afford to eliminate it, and can't afford to go 1A. It's really hurts the rest of athletics."

Much of the sport cuts at Rutgers...most of those $$$$ went straight to the Football Program.

Rutgers invests in football but cuts other sports
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2667334

If you look at the return on investment, BCS-level Division 1A football is worth the investment. If UCF folks think otherwise, why are they so adamant in their pursuit of Big East membership?

bitcruncher Wrote:

KnightLight Wrote:

BullsFanatic Wrote:Two more things:
1. I forgot that Rutgers cut 6 sports last year. So budget deficits have already affected one Big East school.
2. This quote from the A-10 board describes the situation really well:
"URI and UMass can't afford D1AA football, can't afford to eliminate it, and can't afford to go 1A. It's really hurts the rest of athletics."

Much of the sport cuts at Rutgers...most of those $$$$ went straight to the Football Program.

Rutgers invests in football but cuts other sports
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2667334

If you look at the return on investment, BCS-level Division 1A football is worth the investment. If UCF folks think otherwise, why are they so adamant in their pursuit of Big East membership?

Hence the title INVEST.

Yes...RU "invested" $$$$$ from money losing sports into football...for a much better chance of a positive return.

Some of those that support Title IX and others that collegiate athletes is just one Utopia place...feel that positive return/profit on certain sports shouldn't matter...and that no sports should be cut...and more women's teams should be added.

KnightLight Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:

KnightLight Wrote:

BullsFanatic Wrote:Two more things:
1. I forgot that Rutgers cut 6 sports last year. So budget deficits have already affected one Big East school.
2. This quote from the A-10 board describes the situation really well:
"URI and UMass can't afford D1AA football, can't afford to eliminate it, and can't afford to go 1A. It's really hurts the rest of athletics."

Much of the sport cuts at Rutgers...most of those $$$$ went straight to the Football Program.

Rutgers invests in football but cuts other sports
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2667334

If you look at the return on investment, BCS-level Division 1A football is worth the investment. If UCF folks think otherwise, why are they so adamant in their pursuit of Big East membership?

Hence the title INVEST.

Yes...RU "invested" $$$$$ from money losing sports into football...for a much better chance of a positive return.

Some of those that support Title IX and others that collegiate athletes is just one Utopia place...feel that positive return/profit on certain sports shouldn't matter...and that no sports should be cut...and more women's teams should be added.

Once again, you've proven your lack of intellect. Title IX is just another attempt by the federal government to legislate how we live our lives, and the NCAA governing body is a joke.

All you want to do is denegrate programs you feel are targets of opportunity because you are sick that your school has to climb up the ladder to become 2nd rate. By knocking Rutgers, you build up the image of UCF in your mind to the point where you imagine UCF to be superior. What a joke you are. And everybody can see it but you.

But as has been proven time and again, whenever you question a moron's intelligence, he loudly protests, and proves his ignorance at the same time. The worst thing a person can do to a moron like you is question your non-existant intelligence.

Shut up... and go back to the CUSA forum where you belong, BEast wannabe.

Bit I guess You and I just read what KL says differently. he didnt say he believes those things. Just that some with power do. He is right that some people say it doesn't matter if sports are self sufficient or even close to it, just the schollie #s need to be fair.
I don't, nor do I think you agree with that belief, but it does rule the day. It all comes from a left of center belief system that leads to the whole politically correct movement, and to be honest the more power to the elite leadership of the country. I don't even see where he knocks Rutgers just states the facts. I think Rutgers has done what was best for the school, by investing in football over other sports. He makes no claim to what he thinks only that some others disagree, saying they are throwing away fairness and equal sharing for $$$.

I did miss that. Ah well. Maybe I need to get thicker glasses.

Some throw it away so some folks can't make $$$... I have no idea what motivates some people. And I'll never figure out why short-sighted people with narrow minds can't see what's there before them. Maybe they're unable to see around their preconceptions.

The problem is, those people are in charge, making decisions about eastern sports.

My guess is they will require schools to charge less for the athletic fees as part of the tuition if the economy continues to tank.