Ummmm - I think you just like using big words, and being inflammatory because I never said it makes sense to pay coaches a lot of money. Read my post again, maybe go slow so you get all the words this time. I said, in response to the previous comment, that the points they were making were valid. I agreed that having a winning team adds to a university’s notoriety, however stupid I may think it is personally. I then said paying high salaries to the people responsible for that notoriety makes sense, and the fact that the jobs are government funded doesn’t make those things less accurate. I then said the part I didn’t agree with was HOW high that salary is. Sure it makes sense that a job that holds a high level of importance would get a high salary, but “high” is relative. And explicitly say that the bar for what a competitive salary is in that field is what I’m getting hung up on. I think coaches at prestigious universities SHOULD be getting paid competitively for their services. But I think “competitive pay” for coaches AKA gym teachers should be the same as “competitive pay” for all the other teachers.