[Taylor]

I agree the title is misleading. I believe the OP's intention is to say, "schools fund these other programs mightily, another good investment may be the robotics team."
As far as return on investment, I'd argue that with some tweaking, robotics could rival that of sports. Robotics competitions don't have to be free - we do that by choice. I've never been to a Battlebots competition, but I'd expect to pay $5 (especially if it was televised). I don't know of any sport that has free admission for spectators. Add in money brought in from concessions, too (if done right a cash cow). Athletics fans buy athletic team shirts, hats, promotional items - robotics could do the same (see 254).
If we ever do get to the point of a team in every high school, robotics will probably be self-sustaining, as some of the major sports are (basketball, football). The difference right now is if students want to learn about football, every Friday night for three months, five dollars will give them three hours of football experience. If a student wants to learn about robotics, there is a much different learning curve - travel to a regional, district, or offseason event that are far apart geographically and chronologically. (I'd be interested to see the impact of FiM and MAR on the general public after it's been around for five or ten years.)
Sports can be very good. FRC was designed to emulate the best of sports. Like Scott said, let's not minimize the importance or impact of sports; let's add another dimension to the fans' experience.