Monday, July 28, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 21 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

UH opponents get more money from taxpayers and students

By Ferd Lewis

LAST UPDATED: 09:19 a.m. HST, May 15, 2012

The University of Hawaii's soon-to-be opponents in the Big West Conference all subsidize their athletic programs at a rate twice that of UH, according to a USA Today study published today.

The paper said UH athletics receives 32.6 of its funding from state taxpayers and university funds, while the schools UH Manoa will join in the Big West all receive at least 65 percent support from the state and the university monies, including student tuition and fees. Six of the current Big West members have 75 percent or more of their costs subsidized, according to the USA Today study.

Figures are from 2006-2011, the paper said.

Most UH teams except football will leave the Western Athletic Conference and join the Big West July 1st.

Football will join  the Mountain West July 1st, where six schools are subsidized at a higher rate than UH. Of the current MWC members, only Boise State (28 percent) is subsidized less than UH. 

 Print   Email   Comment | View 21 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
Masami wrote:
"..........only Boise State (28 percent) is subsidized less than UH." Considering Boise State's success and consistent national rankings at the top of the football polls in what seems like "forever", it seems to infer that UH's subsidy is adequate and it takes MORE THAN SUBSIDIES to create a successful football program
on May 15,2012 | 08:56AM
OldDiver wrote:
Boise State has advantages over UH like being located on the Mainland, having a fraction of our cost of living, being isolated and protected by a prying media, lower admission standards.
on May 15,2012 | 09:14AM
OldDiver wrote:
Should have been "from a prying media".
on May 15,2012 | 09:15AM
maafifloos wrote:
Location, location, location. UH will never make the big time. Cannot attract the big time players!
on May 15,2012 | 09:36AM
inverse wrote:
If anything Hawaii has a SUPERIOR location than Boise State, land of potatoes. How many blue chip high school recruits come from Idaho compared to the blue chip recruits coming out of Hawaii? Top football universities from all over the nation come to Hawaii to recruit! What about the Punahou kid going to Notre Dame to become their star linebacker, who might make an impact in the NFL like Junior Seau in San Diego. Bottom line is if and when UH ever fields a consistent team like Boise State, the best Hawaii and mainland blue chip recruits will attend UH and make a UH a perennial winner that makes lots of money. This is a chicken and egg sort of thing. In order to have a winning team, you need great players, however in order to great the best of the best, you need a winning team. That is where a great coach comes in to create the framework of a solid team, recruit some key players, get the best of the current players and with a little luck, break out of a losing cycle and start a winning cycle. Sorry, I don't see Chow breaking UH out of the cycle, and to add insult to injury, UH loses their star quarterback when he gets arrested for drunk driving. However will find out real soon if Chow has what it takes like JJ (after he rid himself of his inner demons) and the Boise State head coach to break the vicious losing cycle that UH is currently in.
on May 15,2012 | 12:04PM
Manoa2 wrote:
Idaho is like Hawaii-- small state, but produces good football players in proportion to the population-- NFL players per capita is similar to Hawaii's. But most important-- Boise is next to California, Utah, and Washington and Oregon-- especially California where Boise gets its talent from-- a big advantage over Hawaii. The best teams like Boise are always near a recruting hotbed-- California, Texas, Florida, Michigan/Ohio/Illinois, Alabama/Louisiana/Missippi--Hawaii is not (Hawaii has players, but not enough especially since many want to play on the mainland).
on May 15,2012 | 01:19PM
inverse wrote:
Google the term "NFL players from Hawaii vs Idaho" and there is a website dedicated to listing all NFL players individually from each college. As I expected, trying to compare the same time period, quite a few more NFL players are from UH than Boise State. Of course if you compare UH vs U of Alabama, Alabama has way more than UH. Maybe for ego protection, we can say Hawaii is at a disadvantage due to time zones, far away, etc. but the stats don't lie. The inherent potential for UH to be national football powerhouse is there, regardless of our time zone/location.
on May 15,2012 | 02:58PM
maafifloos wrote:
Location (time zone) = market area (exposure) = revenue = quality players.
on May 15,2012 | 01:47PM
inverse wrote:
In this day of DVR's, online streaming of sporting events, etc. IF a UH player is a superstar Al Noga, Lelie, etc., AND Hawaii can dominate their conference like Boise State, I guarantee you, sports networks WILL make accommodations to give the UH football team national exposure. To travel from Hawaii to the West coast is only about a 5 hour flight. It is very Darwinian, you win way more games than you lose, you get exposure, national/international attention (ie American Samoa 'pipeline" and your school makes MONEY. You are a LOSER, all the public relations schemes in the world will NOT fool football recruits, fans and the networks. It is a simple formula that is almost 100 percent accurate. UH wins games and dominates their conference on a consistent basis and they make MONEY, the lose games like they have under Macmuffin they will NOT attracts recruits, fans and lose MILLIONS of dollars of Hawaii taxpayers and UH student monies.
on May 15,2012 | 02:32PM
busterb wrote:
Yeah but most of the Big West schools play in tiny HS sort of gyms. It's not like ticket sales are anything close to what UH brings in. That's why their taxpayers have to pay more. Not a reason to up Hawaii's input to UH athletics. I love the Warriors, Wahine, et al., but we are going from just another program to the big fish in a small conference. And not having to travel to places like Las Cruses, Moscow and Ruston, costs should be WAY down. we should be paying less.
on May 15,2012 | 09:01AM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
Where do we allocate monies? The academics or sports? Just because the other schools choose to be football schools does not mean UH should become one. It angers me that students have to pay an "athletic fee" when they go to school when in fact they are not going to school for sports. They are going to school to get a degree so that they can get ahead in life. To force them to pay an "athletic fee" just so that their athletic counterparts can play their sports is ridiculous. Parents who send their children to UH are being forced to cough up this money. The athletic department should hold fund raisers instead of bullying the students into paying their expenses. No one pays for the engineering student's fees or chemistry student's lab fees. Why should they have to pay for a football players' fees? Many of them are working students who have to pay for their dormitories and/or books. Many struggle to pay these costs and they have to still pay this "athletic fee" which amounts to extortion. When the football player goes to the NFL does he repay these students back for the money that they paid for them to advance their "athletic" career? No. Do the NFL player play a role in UH's advancement? No. So where is the payback for such an "athletic fee" for those who have invested in them? All the results are superficial and do not advance UH as an academic school. So are we a football school or are we an academic school?
on May 15,2012 | 09:10AM
BlueDolphin53 wrote:
Yours is an argument that has raged for decades, and will continue well into the future. There is no easy answer. I
on May 15,2012 | 09:34AM
Bean808 wrote:
Here's a small part of solution. We don't have to hire a Chancellor at some ridiculous salary to do virtually nothing or what the President should be doing.
on May 15,2012 | 09:13AM
Wonderful_World wrote:
That's exactly what I was going to say! Get rid of the Chancellor position & stop the extra housing fund for the Pres!
on May 15,2012 | 10:14AM
ragnar wrote:
Did the study report how many of these schools charge local taxpayers a fee to watch football games on Pay-Per-View? Oh wait.
on May 15,2012 | 10:04AM
jkjones wrote:
UH is fraught with entitlement bureaucrats and mindless beancounters. A timeless enterprise of sleepwalkers. UHAD is worst of the beast. Funding should be reduced or based on performance. That should trim the roach population at Manoa.
on May 15,2012 | 10:17AM
Holomua wrote:
Well, we're paying for a Chancellor. That's why we can't subsidize more.
on May 15,2012 | 10:33AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Bring the whole UH Athletics budget down to the level of the Big West schools the article compares, and the percentage of UH public assistance goes way up. Big West schools don't have football, which costs a lot but presumably brings in a lot. Add in the revenues of football somewhere into the calculations, and the numbers won't seem as dramatic. Also, would be interesting to know if the highly subsidized schools are part of the crumbling and debt ridden U California/Cal State systems. Terribly deceptive or tunnel visioned article. In these times, UH Athletics should not be subsidized any further or greater than it already is.
on May 15,2012 | 11:17AM
dalawyer wrote:
Turn No Aloha Stadium over to UH athletics and let them run the facility. More to the UH coffers while eliminating the need for the the Stadium authority and personnel. Get rid of the high paid state workers!
on May 15,2012 | 02:20PM
blackkitty wrote:
Ferd: So what's the point of your article? Comparing apples and coconuts doesn't add up ... budgets of bigger school vs. little schools are not comparable. As they say, figures don't lie, but liars figure!
on May 15,2012 | 07:20PM
cbie808 wrote:
Why isn't this a blue star subscriber content article?
on May 15,2012 | 08:44PM
Breaking News