The U of A’s ‘radical shift’

By STEVE BRAWNER

What happened January 28 at the University of Arkansas Board of Trustees meeting was indeed a “radical shift.”

That’s how one trustee, Judd Deere, accurately described it in speaking later to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

The board voted to transfer somewhere between $10 million and $11 million annually from university operations to the athletic department. The vote was 7-3, with Deere one of the three voting no.

The shift is occurring in two ways. First, the trustees’ resolution ends the athletic department’s annual transfer of funding to the university, which has averaged $4.4 million the last three years. Second, the resolution calls on Chancellor Dr. Charles Robinson and Athletic Director Hunter Yurachek to create a plan for the university to generate $6 million annually for the athletic department. 

Robinson and Yurachek said they had not seen the resolution prior to the meeting.

What made this shift “radical” is the fact that the UA has long taken pride in being one of a small number of major universities nationwide that hasn’t subsidized its athletic department. 

But that talking point has been drowned out by two much louder new realities. One is that elite college athletes are now highly paid professionals, and also free agents ever looking for the best deal possible. A top quarterback can earn more than $3.5 million per year, CBS Sports reported. A mid-level one earns between $1.5 and $2.5 million.

The other reality is that the Razorbacks football team has not been good for a long time. This past season’s 2-10 record was especially frustrating because six close losses were decided by one score. With a little better players, it could have been a good season. 

Robinson does not want to pay for the funding transfer through student athletics fees. Maybe Yurachek and he can find the money another way.

However it’s done, university money will be shifted to athletics, and from the general student population to a small number of athletes. 

On a financial level, the Board of Trustees’ vote can be defended. Many millions of dollars have been sunk into the program. The head coach alone will make $6.5 million this year. The football stadium is built to seat 76,000 people. Winning fills those seats and helps pay for all of this.

Moreover, the Razorbacks are the most important public relations tool the UA has. 

People like associating with a winner. MarketWatch reported in 2024 that the University of Alabama’s enrollment increased from 25,580 to 39,623 while Coach Nick Saban was leading the football program to six national championships. Many students came from out of state, enriching the university through higher tuition rates.

It wasn’t all because the Crimson Tide was winning national championships. The school also made a major recruiting push for out-of-state students. But Alabama’s weekly football success and national exposure certainly helped. The chancellor told “60 Minutes” that Saban was “the best financial investment this university has ever made.” Saban was earning $5.5 million then and earned $11 million his last year.

That’s one side of the argument. 

On the other hand, universities reflect a society’s values – and pass them on to students.

And the value that’s being reinforced is that the most important thing a young person can do is throw a football. It’s clearly far more important than studying to be a nurse, engineer, or teacher. The dollars say so.

The University of Arkansas estimates that it costs $32,690 for a typical undergraduate to attend each year. A $10 million annual transfer to athletics could instead have provided full-ride scholarships to more than 300 traditional students.

Perhaps it would be worth it if that $10 million brought six national championships, great publicity, and an influx of out-of-state students.

But whatever the University of Arkansas does, the other major college programs also will be doing. “College” sports is increasingly becoming an absurd race to pour money into athletic departments’ bottomless pits. Universities will spend millions in the coming years hoping to be the next Alabama, or at least to keep up with each other. But no matter how much everyone spends, someone’s going to win, and someone’s going to lose. 

Regardless, traditional students trying to get an education should not be forced to pay for it through increased fees. 

That kind of shift not only would be “radical.” It would be wrong.

Steve Brawner’s column is syndicated to 21 outlets in Arkansas. Email him at brawnersteve@mac.com.