"Donations to other university departments are down, too, the Tribune reports." So I am not sure the reader can automatically assume it is down by the same percentage as the football contributions. Even The Columbia Daily Tribune article, the source material, doesn't give a percentage of decline on the academic side. Instead it only mentions the following,

"The decline in donations is being felt by the academic side of university fundraising, as well. New pledges and donations overall fell $6 million in December, usually one of the biggest months because donors are planning their tax deductions."

Earlier in the article Missouri's AD does make some interesting quotes regarding the situation at Missouri:

“There’s a direct correlation between the success of your teams and the amount of money that you have capacity to raise,” MU Athletic Director Mack Rhoades said. “Also, in addition to that, the football team did not have a terrific season, did not go to a bowl game. And you factor that in with what happened on campus, people are upset with the university and the athletics department. The combination of the two is why I feel that donations are down, particularly in the month of December.”

The reason I thought the author might have an agenda is because the article/blurb only focuses on the protest from the players. Whereas Rhoades's quote suggests there are multiple factors to explain the drop in contributions. I never said that the protests from the players and other students wasn't a factor in the decline in donations. I am just skeptical that it is the only explanation and maybe even the primary explanation.
[Post edited by VTHokie2000 at 02/23/2016 09:55AM]