Remember when I was criticized on here for saying schools / boosters throwing millions at football recruits and players is going to take away funding from non-revenue sports (citing a New York Times article interviewing an AD), and Cam from 247 came on here to tell me how wrong I was and that everyone but him is lying about the financials of athletic departments? Well, Mr. Cam just tweeted about how NOTRE DAME of all schools is too broke to pay for the new Offensive Coordinator they wanted for their football team. If ND is too broke to make a very important football hire, maybe I, and all of the evidence from the NYTimes and public data on university budgets, was right in saying that there isn't some imaginary huge pool of extra cash in athletic departments to use to pay football players. It would certainly appear as though any money coming out of athletic departments and going direct from booster to recruit would lead to less money for non-revenue sports that rely on athletic department donations to survive.
How can college football writers say both that athletic departments are flush with cash and are simply lying when they say they're barely profitable, but also say that one of the richest programs is too broke to make a simple hire? The hypocrisy among college football writers is laughable and their lack of honesty and professionalism has contributed to the screwing over of collegiate athletics outside of the 32ish football programs that make said journalists the most money.