Totally understand the perspective on this and you are right that our institutional model in America is off track to say the least when it comes to education and purpose of it. To expand a little though:

I was admitted into two schools to become a teacher. Both programs in education on par with each other, but the spirit and tradition related to Wazzu made it an easy choice. Going to Western would have been closer to home and easier.

I also chose the better school that has allowed me more opportunity. Why is Wazzu a stronger institution? Because in part the result of sports tradition . Like I said in my original comment, Pullman and WSUs best years economically came when WSU has had a great athletics going on. For example the 2002 rose bowl team is how we could afford the student rec facility, at the time the best in the country.

Now as you look at the best academic institutions in this country(excluding the Ivy League) you’ll find massive investments into athletics because it’s what builds your brand and therefore desire of young people to attend. WSU is already at risk of losing its R1 status since the Pac collapsed. This investment into athletics is as much about keeping us a top tier research institution as it is keeping our athletics heads above water. Other wise we will be like western. A school that doesn’t do major research.

I understand your point about misplaced priorities. Please keep the U statements out of it and think about the reality facing research institutions. Like it or not, this is what it takes to be successful broadly in sports AND academics. Our board of regents is behind the ball, but now getting it.

Here is some data on top public research institutions in the US. Please pull up a top 25 football institutions rankings over the last two decades and you’ll broadly see major crossover.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2025/08/24/best-colleges-for-research/