Should the burden of a pay raise fall on the students?

College basketball programs are often criticized when they don't open up their bank accounts to keep a dynamic, up-and-coming young head coach around.

They are lauded when they do.

The most recent example of this is Wichita State's Gregg Marshall. After leading the Shockers to the NIT title and a second place finish in the Missouri Valley during the regular season, Marshall received a three-year extension and a $100,000 raise, meaning that he will be cashing $900,000 worth of checks annually until 2018.

Much of the reason behind Marshall landing this extension was due to his success on the basketball court -- when he first took over the program, the Shockers were buried at the bottom of the conference. But what cannot be ignored is that some bigger programs came poking around this offseason. Marshall's name was throw in the mix during both the NC State and Texas A&M coaching searches.

That's the same reason that Richmond's Chris Mooney, Butler's Brad Stevens, and VCU's Shaka Smart all got raises and extensions in the past two years. The lack of a raise played a role in Jim Larrananga's decision to leave George Mason for Miami.

It makes sense. Coaches are like people in any other profession. They want job and financial security while working at a place they enjoy in a city they can raise their family. Contract extensions are a great way to provide the first half of those requirements.

The issue is that someone has to pay for those contract extensions, which is a difficult thing to do considering that most athletic departments are already operating in the red. Many times, the money comes from private donors and boosters, like in Wichita State's case.

In VCU's case, however, is it possible that the burden has fallen onto the student's?


VCU has announced a student fee increase of $50 in part because they are increasing the athletics budget by $875,000, of which $733,000 is going to the basketball program. There was no increase in student fees prior to last season, but prior to the 2009-2010 school year, VCU increased student fees by $137, the fourth consecutive year that they did so. VCU also increased tuition for in-state students by $700.

Now, Smart's contract went from $325,000 a year to $1.2 million a year, which, when combined with the pay bumps for his coaching staff and the money that will be used to upgrade the basketball facilities, clearly means that the $733,000 earmarked for the hoops program will not cover the entirety of Smart's big payday. But its impossible to ignore the fact that this much more of the money that the university will be receiving from its students will be funneled to the hoops program mere months after the head coach signs a monster (for the CAA) new contract.

Is it fair to make the student's foot the bill to keep around a head coach?

For some -- the VCU hoops fans -- that answer is obviously yes. But there are over 32,000 full-time students at VCU (they were actually the largest school at the Final Four this year in terms of enrollment), and I'm willing to bet that there are quite a few of those 32,000 folks couldn't tell you the difference between Shaka Smart and Chaka Khan.

Should those students that don't care about the basketball program have to supplement the coach's income?