Well, sure, but now we're right back to "the institution's primary mission."

Those profits may drive alumni loyalty/donations, but otherwise, they do little for the academic community on campus-- other than provide more $$ to run the programs associated with the larger Athletic Department. Things that have to be there to satisfy Title ix, but aren't money-makers.

Now, I have no objection to funding the college education of young women who are volleyball or rugby talents and have few other routes to college.

But I have a big problem when a star volleyball player with a 1300 SAT can go for free and a kid just above the local median HHI and SAT 2000 can't go at all.

Personally, I think higher ed ought to shed the pro-sports farm system. But that's me. DH turned down athletic scholarships at two different top-25 schools because the coaching staff were not going to permit him to choose a STEM major. Too much time involved, apparently. And that was 30 years ago-- it certainly isn't better now, and few kids would feel able to walk away from a full ride like that.

Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.