The writer, a McCook, Neb., native, was president/chancellor at three major state universities (Illinois State University, West Virginia University and the University of Kansas).

In recent weeks, I have reached out to a dozen presidents-chancellors to get their take on the state of college football; all of them came from big-time academic-athletic institutions of higher learning. All but one believes that the current football climate has a financial grip on their campuses and that change is unlikely anytime soon. The one dissenter holds out some hope for a partial return to sanity.

No one referred to the once highly charged and publicized “arms race” in college athletics. No one. More than half of them believe the National Collegiate Athletic Association has been asked, for too long, to fend off an unruly mob with a switch and that this environment has been raging for more than a decade.

The truth is only a handful of major football programs actually make money. (The NCAA reports 22 made money in 2009-10.) Meanwhile, the rest struggle to break even. Even with soaring television income, greatly increased ticket prices and mounting contributions from alumni and other contributors, big-time college athletics remains a challenging and risky business.

Interestingly, students are today lined up deep to purchase college football tickets, while 10 to 15 years ago athletic directors feared a possible decline in student interest. Athletic events have become “the thing to do” on weekends; some athletic programs even offer the purchase of beer to help offset mounting athletic department expenses.

Let us not forget, marquee football coaches are paid millions of dollars a year — many, many times over what is allotted outstanding faculty members and administrators.

“Our faculty members are entering a season of discontent as they learn about the enhanced salaries and bonuses being given football coaches at our universities, while they admit to facing another lean year for faculty salaries,” one of the presidents declared. The others chimed in to support their colleague.

The facts are undisputable, as reported from recent salary studies:

According to a 2010-11 report by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics, the average salary for a professor at a doctoral-granting institution was just over $107,000, and according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, there were three public university presidents in 2011 who made more than $1.9 million annually, one who cleared a million, one who made nearly a million and one who made $845,105.

College football coaches continue to enjoy mounting compensation, with 42 of them making at least $2 million a season, according to SI.com. That is more than a 70 percent increase since 2006 and a trend that shows no sign of slowing. The highest paid is Nick Saban, Alabama’s coach, at $5.5 million, and he is among the top eight in the powerful Southeastern Conference.

The Associated Press added kerosene to the fire when it reported annual spending by public universities in the six big conferences, the Southeastern Conference and Big 12 among them, has passed $100,000 per athlete — about six to 12 times the amount those institutions are spending per student on academics.

“University presidents are red-faced,” one of the respondents said. Many critics believe that successful football coaches have more sway with governing boards than college university presidents. Despite the perception, I disagree.

But I do believe that university presidents have the right to expect strong trustee backing when they set out to right apparent and egregious wrongs. The queried CEOs agreed. The truth is presidents-chancellors do have considerable power, but their tenures are, on average, short — little more than eight years.

And remember, virtually all of them assumed their roles for academic reasons, not in order to preside over athletic programs, and they are often ill prepared to do so. At the same time, many board members who are fixated on football success have longer tenure than campus presidents.

Successful football programs do build substantial loyalty among many alumni, students and fans in general, and they do open doors to potential givers to the universities. Sometimes major gifts go for academic purposes.

But modern-day college athletic programs are complex and defy simplistic remedies; they are a combination of academics, entertainment, business, sports, societal values and sometimes-childlike pride. Exchanges with energetic fans and cerebral professors often turn ugly.

But much is amok, according to the 12 respected presidents/chancellors, and on that I wholeheartedly agree.

Commenting is limited to Omaha World-Herald subscribers. To sign up, click here.

If you're already a subscriber and need to activate your access or log in, click here.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Please keep it clean, turn off CAPS LOCK and don't threaten anyone. Be truthful, nice and proactive. And share with us - we love to hear eyewitness accounts.

You must be a digital subscriber to view this article.