I doubt executive salaries make up a significant portion of any school's budget. Overpaid non-executive administrators are a much larger cost in aggregate, because there are so many of them.

That's not quite true: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/06/higher-eds-for-profit-fut...

"compensation of a single person like Zimmer now approaches the reported inflation-adjusted $3 million annual operating deficit that ended a community resource benefiting both medical students and trauma patients."

UChicago spent $446M on academic salaries, $889M on staff salaries and $338M on benefits (not broken out into academic vs non-academic) in the the 2011-2012 fiscal year that Zimmer's compensation temporarily spiked to $3M. It is safe to say that over $1B was spent on non-academic salary and benefits (administration), which dwarfs both Zimmer's compensation and the $3M operating deficit.

http://finserv.uchicago.edu/pdf/2012FinState.pdf

Yes, you're correct that Zimmer's compensation is less than the total salaries of every other person employed by the university.

I guess we can argue about the meaning of the word "significant" now.

I thought research was funded through grants and sports was self funding?

Research is typically a profit center for the university. The standard cut (known as "overhead" in the biz) is 30% of research grants. Capital equipment (typically defined as stuff costing more than X dollars) is taxed at a lower rate (usually 10%). Research assistantships are also charged 30%. Also, any modification to lab facilities (electrical or carpentry for example) is usually required to be performed by university staff at a cost (to the grant) of around 2 to 3 times union rates.

In the private university I work for (in research) the University keeps all patent revenue, keeps a portion of all grants, and requires the lab to pay for space- I was really surprised to find out how much went towards that. There's also a lot of really annoying charges, like costing $180 to reactivate ethernet jacks that they deactivate when a device hasn't been plugged into a port for three months.

Isn't "research" mainly professor and grad student salaries? What's the difference?

I thought sports were mainly profit centers.

Not exactly true:

http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/Myth-College-Sports-Ar...

Only for the major unis.

For everyone else... I'm pretty sure sports COSTS money.

That said... keeping a few young ladies running track can't possibly be the cause of the imbalance people are talking about. I'm pretty sure the money is sucked up by administrative and non instructional staff. But without the spreadsheets it is difficult to say anything with certainty.

Only for certain, usually large, schools

Not usually. Most colleges don't have popular enough teams to turn a profit. And at the ones that do most of the profit ends up being spent on the sports teams (popular teams need big, modern, expensive stadiums). Almost no money flows from sports to education. At best there's an argument that sports helps drive enrollment and helps drive alumni donations. Though even then because of the cost of most sports programs it's questionable whether or not they break even on average.

The latter two are the one's that should be most limited.