Yes, and many were / are athletes as well. If you are trying to advance the argument that academics don't see the value of varsity sports, then you'll have to explain why any decent university has varsity sports, because (with rare exception) they are money-losing ventures.
Decisions such as these are made at the university-level (i.e., by the President), and the notion that department heads / chairs have anything to do with it is inaccurate. Deans will all argue for more funding, as they should, but the decision is not theirs.
Moreover, while University Presidents do see the value of varsity athletics, the equation is very different for each school. UBC is one of 3 Canadian universities that have a very strong international reputation (McGill and Toronto being the others), so they have little to gain from having a successful varsity sports program. Also consider that UBC is also in a unique position because their teams have to fly to the vast majority of their road games. While university Presidents are willing to fund varsity athletes because they do see some value in them, there is an upper bound in that equation.
It's not hard to see why many other schools, such as Lakehead, Carleton, or UNB, willingly invest in varsity sports - their reputation is not as strong (outside of their region), and so they have much to gain from having a successful hockey / basketball program that attracts media attention.
But to suggest that UBC may cut varsity athletics because many academics are "brainy bookworms" is quite laughable.