The fall of 2009 witnessed noteworthy decisions about athletics at two flagship American universities – the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa. At Berkeley, the faculty senate voted on a resolution regarding subsidies to the university's athletic department. In the wake of stunning rates of unemployment and home foreclosures in California, a state budget crisis marked by furloughs for state employees, a proposed 32% increase in tuition, a projected university deficit of $150 million, and student protests over planned cuts, the issue of athletic subsidies rose to unaccustomed prominence. The precipitating factor was information revealing not only that the athletic department was regularly subsidized by the university, but also that the department had run additional deficits. What raised the ire of critics was the revelation that the central administration had, two years before, forgiven an accumulation of past department overruns amounting to more than $30 million. At a tense faculty senate meeting where administrators sought to defend the subsidies, the debate on the floor ultimately came down to university priorities. A world of limited resources had become one of shrinking resources. Was athletics worth $7 million a year, or more?

The faculty senate declared it was not. By a vote of 91 to 68, the faculty body decided to ask the chancellor to put an end to annual subsidies and to require the repayment of the previous year's unbudgeted deficit.