The preseason polls are in, and traditional football powers such as Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Southern California, Alabama and Ohio State are firmly entrenched.

There is optimism at many college and universities, with students, faculty, staff, alumni and the general public believing pollsters have it wrong this time around. This is “their year.” The college community enriches all of sports with its competitive spirit.

The booming sound of the marching band can be heard across the campus as it wraps up preparation for another year of colorful halftime performances, and the sounds of the cheerleading squads going through their routines resonate at stadiums around the country.

All this before a single football has been kicked off in most places.

Yes, it seems like just another season, with the campus traditions unfolding as usual and student smiles abounding.

Not so.

Behind the lush, ivy-covered walls of academia is a deep and growing concern about private giving, a staple of modern-day university quality.

Private endowments have been hit hard by an ailing stock market (some portfolios have lost as much as 20 to 25 percent) while state after state has slashed university budgets (many state schools have suffered double-digit reductions and a repeat appears possible).

It will take some time for college and university endowments to recover and return to previous levels. In 2008, for example, there were more than $412 billion in assets at 796 major colleges and universities. The number is appreciably smaller today.

The state cuts have struck bone, resulting in larger classes, faculty morale problems, use of many temporary teachers, unprecedented stress on operational budgets and diminished quality in general. Maintenance for buildings at many schools has been indefinitely postponed, resulting in structural concerns and a staggering backload which will eventually cost millions of extra dollars.

What concerns many presidents and chancellors most is the inescapable fact that some of the biggest donors are having trouble meeting pledges for athletics and academic programs. For those who give to both areas, and many do, it has become increasingly clear that the greater interest seems to be on the football field and the basketball court, not the classroom.

For many years, college presidents have justified big-time sports programs to the public, alumni, and the faculty as an effective way to introduce potential givers to the total university and expose them to the specific needs of students, faculty, staff, and of the overall academic program.

It certainly sounded good, and in numerous instances the strategy has worked, especially in major fundraising drives. Most major schools are, in fact, either planning for, or in the process of a significant drive.

Today, however, there are many holes in the portfolios of the affluent. Many contributors are asking to be called later, or when the economic uncertainty has been settled.

Furthermore, faculty members, suspicious by nature, are less likely to accept the massive salaries being given successful football and basketball coaches. One can expect the volume of criticism to increase significantly in the new academic year. Salaries of the teaching faculty have gained little or nothing because of economic restraints, and the reduction of staff has resulted in increased teaching loads, much higher than in previous years.

Though football and basketball are popular with students, you may be assured that the young will be one in voice on the issue of fundamental fairness to the faculty when it comes to salaries and workload. Even the students are somewhat uneasy when the topic turns to the propriety of $4 million-a-year coaches.

A gambler from Las Vegas would probably give odds that the next few years will favor athletics over academics, but there is room for both. Realistically, higher education is central to the future of the United States and it cannot be starved. Stiff international competition demands equitable treatment for our colleges and universities in the areas of instruction, research and service. Competitive programs will bring hope, good jobs, and quality of life to Americans, young and old alike.