By Joseph Abraham, Editor-in-Chief

Published in print on Apr.1, 2015

Athletics spending at UNCG has been an issue on my mind for quite some time.

Before I express my opinion, I want to clarify that I am not someone who dislikes sports. In fact, sports are my passion, and after graduation I hope to pursue a career in sports journalism.

Throughout my four years on this campus, I have been a fan of UNCG sports, showering praise when it is deserved, as well as analyzing where they have went wrong. I was a sports writer my freshman year, sports editor my sophomore and junior years, so I am 100 percent confident that too much of students’ money is going to athletics on this campus.

On Oct. 24, Howard Bunsis, an accounting professor at Eastern Michigan University and chair of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) National Collective Bargaining Congress, presented a 100-slide PowerPoint to UNCG’s faculty, staff and administration on the institution’s revenue, spending and priorities.

The Carolinian’s news section did a story on the report, but our focus was on the overall state of UNCG’s finances, as well as Bunsis’ belief that UNCG’s administration was “bloated”. However, it is pages 93-97 of the Bunsis report that I find most fascinating. In these pages, Bunsis reviewed the financial state of UNCG athletics from 2005 to 2013.

Bunsis referenced the USA Today Database for his data.

In 2005, UNCG spent $7,292,609 on athletics. Jumping forward eight years to 2013, athletics spending totaled $14,966,482.

When looking at Bunsis’ slide on athletic revenues (p.97)— once again referencing the USA Today Database— it illustrates that in 2005 athletics revenues were $7,951,158. Of the 2005 revenue, $4,413,225 came from student fees, and $1,621,045 came from school funds. Ticket sales only accounted for $65,414 of the $7,951,158 earned in 2005.

In 2013, athletics revenues were almost double those in 2005.

That’s good, right? Not exactly.

Of the $14,672,177 of athletics revenue, $8,662,026 came from student fees (more than double what UNCG students paid in 2005), and $3,674,007 came from school funds.

Bunsis summarized this information saying, “The student fee and school funds are direct support for athletics from the core academic mission.”

On page 96, Bunsis shows the percent changes in athletics and academics from 2008 to 2013. 

In the 5-year span, percent changes in instruction expense (9 percent), total instruction compensation (12 percent), and all university expenses (17 percent) added together were alarmingly lower than percent changes related to athletics.

The change in total athletics spending between 2008 and 2013 was 48 percent, with the change in coaches’ compensation not far behind at 44 percent.

So why is this a problem?

As a student who has witnessed the rollercoaster ride that is UNCG sports over the course of four years, I do not believe the increase in the amount of student fees I pay to athletics has benefited them at all. There are few Southern Conference Tournament wins or NCAA Tournament appearances to show for it.

I understand trying to make athletics more important, and while I care about how the Spartans do every season, I question how many of my peers echo that sentiment.

I remember my sophomore year when I attended a soccer game where we hosted UNC-Charlotte, a nationally ranked team at the time, and played them to a draw. We had great crowd support that season, especially with a men’s basketball resurrection by a young head coach, and a deep run in the SoCon Tournament. But even then, it was only a small fragment of this campus that showed interest in athletics.

This is a campus that prides itself on the arts, education, nursing and business. We are nationally recognized for these programs— not for our sports.

I attended a faculty senate meeting last month. There was a presentation given by a technology committee, and they talked about improving equipment in the classroom. It was then revealed that our university ranks as one of the lowest out of its peers in the amount of student fees that go towards technology. As students we can all benefit from new technology.

With the UNC system constantly facing budget cuts from the General Assembly, it seems prudent, now more than ever, that we lower the amount of student fees allocated towards athletics, and redirect it into the realm of academia.

At the end of the day, all athletes are students, but not all students are athletes.