At some schools the athletics program gets considerable tuition revenue as well (in the form of a tacked-on "athletics fee"). UF seems to have one of the lower fees ($57/yr), though when multiplied by 50,000 students, that still works out to a bit under $3m/yr. It appears (see sibling comment) that athletics contributes back some surplus to academics, though, so may be a net positive at UF. Not true at all schools, some of which have much higher than $57/yr charges (e.g. UVA's $650).

Last I heard, LSU and Nebraska were the only two schools with athletic programs that were both financially and nominally self-sufficient. This was in 2009, I think. This link gives some financial stats on athletics programs starting with the 2004-2005 academic and ending with the 2009-2010 academic year.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ncaa-finances.htm

I believe most state universities are the same.

In other words, the difference between the athletics budget and the academic budget represents the priorities of Americans in general, not any specific group such as a universities administrators.