Paul T,
It may be all about the money, but football at Ivy League institutions -- as well as at most if not virtually all highly-selective universities -- is a net money loser. University subventions to athletic departments cover the shortfalls. For example, in 1998 Columbia's athletic department "officially" reported revenues of $7-million and total expenses of $6-million; however, the entire athletic program generated direct revenues of only $500,000, the remainder being a subvention from the university. Ivy League universities in 1998 spent an average of $9,400 per student-athlete, meaning that fielding a football team even of only 60 ate up all the revenues generated by football, basketball, baseball and hockey.
The "official" Hollywood-esque accounting treatments do not factor in capital expenditures, either.
Whatever the rationale for "athletic preference" as it's known in the Ivy League, it's not to pump out football revenues.
Mark