[jrbran]

As much as I love TMQB, and I do agree about the excesses in administration levels at both college and pro ranks (I believe his post superbowl column dealt with the extravagance of pro front offices, in terms of the labor talks). There are obvious biases to his work :

Some coaches' salaries are covered by booster funds, not by the school itself: but booster funds funnel money that otherwise might have been donated to a school's academic programs

This is simply untrue for most major sports universities. Boosters by and large donate to the school for sports, primarily, and then to education, secondarily. Phil Knight's largesses to the University of Oregon help both athletic and scholarly activities, but when the rumor that he gets to call one play a game [1] indicate the real reason for his contributions. Robert Burton's several million dollar donation to UCONN was primarily focused on its athletics [2] and his lack of approval in their hiring of Paul Pasqualoni resulted in his desire to have his $3million donation refunded.

Rich people aren't bragging to their friends about the SAT scores of their schools, but are bragging when their team beats your team.

[1]http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2011/feb/06/uconn-contro...

[2]http://terrapinstationmd.com/2011/01/26/uconn-donor-writes-v...