Posted on

I don’t see how this pertains to Ridgewood : "Friday Night Lights Prove To Be Budget Busters":

>I don’t see how this pertains to Ridgewood : “Friday Night Lights Prove To Be Budget Busters”: 

I don’t see how this pertains to Ridgewood. I also wonder whether the original poster actually read the article. It is not a discussion about youth sports, which are self-funded in Ridgewood, turf, lights or even that high school football programs in Dallas, Texas are cost prohibitive. It was about how ALL high school football teams in Dallas, Texas generate hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue to defray the costs of their programs and, in a few rare cases, highly successful programs can EASE school budget constraints. The essence of the article is summed up in this line, “as schools are forced to cut back, football teams can offer a rare revenue generator to a district’s general fund — if they are winning football teams.” It concluded that winning football records directly impact whether the school districts studied in Dallas make a profit or not. Interestingly, it very clearly went on to say that “Nothing costs a district more than coaching stipends and salaries.” Sound familiar?? Of 31 schools, the median school’s total net football expenses were less than 3% of the school’s total annual expenses and the head football coach’s salary (alone) was approximately 2% of the school’s total annual expenses. Perhaps that is the message to take away from the article.

The last time I checked, high school sports are not intended or expected to be profit-making enterprises. They are an operating expense for school districts around the country. In Texas, however, the unique culture around high school football creates an opportunity for some winning programs to generate more money for the school than they cost. Those profits then go to the general revenue fund to support non-football programs. That is a nice benefit. But, it is not the objective of any high school sports programs in the United States.

Contrary to the misleading headline of the commentary that was posted on the Ridgewood Blog, the point of the article is NOT to suggest that high school football programs in Dallas are “busting” their school district budgets. It did not blame elaborate facilities or special considerations that are not integral to all sports programs for adversely impacting school budgets. Although as noted above, it did point out that the average head coach’s salary is 40% of he average school expenditure on football. This did not include benefits or the salary and benefits for assistant coaches.

The full article and survey results can be viewed at this address:

The bottom line is that I am not aware of any Ridgewood high school sports program that generates revenue even close to that of high school football programs in Dallas. I am not sure how the expenses compare. My guess is that RHS football is the most expensive athletic program in the school. But, I doubt that Chuck Johnson’s salary is 2% of the total school budget. So, I don’t see the relevance of this article to Ridgewood. More to the point, it has nothing to do with youth sports, college scholarships, the rationale for high school athletics, turf fields or lights.

So, I think the original question, which has gone unanswered, is a fair one. Why was this posted on the Ridgewood Blog?

Save up to 40% on Last Minute Flights with Hotwire Limited Rates!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *