Various reasons, justifications and benefits are cited by university chancellors, presidents, athletic directors and coaches, as well as NCAA officials, for approving a 12th football game for the regular season and allowing wins over much weaker teams to count toward bowl eligibility.

With all the talk about not overemphasizing sports and ensuring that the primary mission of universities is academic achievement and advancement for all of its students, including student athletes, the addition of a 12th game is nothing but a means for athletic departments to make more money.

Who is kidding whom? Money is the driving force in most NCAA Division I athletic departments. Selling the best seats in a fieldhouse or stadium to the highest bidders, taking one of the most attractive games on a team’s schedule to an off-campus location (such as Kansas City’s Arrowhead Stadium), selling scoreboard advertising rights for millions of dollars and selling the rights to outfit athletes are just a few examples of how money calls the shots in most Division I athletic programs, perhaps even at the supposedly pure Ivy League schools. It’s certainly the case among Big 12 Conference schools.

It’s nice to talk about graduation rates, more demanding academic requirements for freshmen athletes, increased funding for tutoring services and the importance of constantly improving facilities for athletes to keep up with other schools, but it is the dollar bill that drives about every aspect of the college sports scene. Football and basketball schedules are put together with an eye on what will make the most attractive games for network television and the financial payoff for those TV games.

Now, there will be added ticket revenue for one more game along with the possibility of landing another spot on the TV schedule.

At one time, there was opposition to adding another game because it would take student athletes away from the classroom or at least divert their attention from their studies. This argument didn’t last long when the possibility of more dollars and an increased chance for a bowl appearance entered the picture. Student athletes will have the season extended even further.

What this is likely to mean for Kansas University football is the scheduling of one game each season away from the campus of either KU or its opponent, perhaps at Arrowhead Stadium, St. Louis’ Edward Jones Dome or possibly Dallas’ Texas Stadium. KU officials now will be able to put a game against a far less attractive opponent in the season ticket package for the local crowd, while keeping the ticket price high, and also stage a far more attractive game, a big money-maker, at a larger off-campus venue.

The only ones in the major college athletic picture not making more money in the current money-driven atmosphere are the players themselves and perhaps some chancellors and presidents. Some will argue that winning athletic teams bring in added dollars for the schools and, through the trickle-down theory, eventually to the teachers.

It would be difficult, however, to find many KU faculty members who see a direct, significant connection between their salaries and the number of wins or losses by the football and basketball teams.

It is a one-way street with intercollegiate athletics playing a bigger and more influential role on college campuses.

Why isn’t there a similar effort to land a truly outstanding teacher, dean or student as there is to land a 7-foot basketball player, a world-class quarterback or a 300-pound lineman who can dominate the offensive or defensive line?

Will the time ever come when university officials and alumni will be just as excited about recruiting a world-class academic as they are about recruiting someone who can throw a football or dunk a basketball?

Do major contributors to the Ivy League schools continue to be generous because of the schools’ athletic prowess or possibly because of the schools’ academic excellence?

What’s the top priority of Big 12 Conference schools? What gets the publicity? What is the general public most interested in: sports or academic excellence?