I first want to say I 100% support Title IX and it should stay.
That being said almost all college sports are just a drain on funds. I propose that sports that can’t support themselves in terms of revenue and expenses then they should be disbanded. Again I support Title IX so most likely there will be some sports that can’t breakeven.
Overall I just don’t see how having a swim team, field hockey, lacrosse team helps the majority of the student body. Let’s face it the majority of students who go to watch these games/matches are just friends of the athletes.
The average student gets little to no benefit from these sports.
Also at elite schools athletes get preferential admissions.
I am a non-athlete and went to exactly one sports event during my time in college. BUT- the university had a state of the art swimming facility, which I used frequently (and loved) and I went to folk dancing, tried tap dancing and swing dancing in a state of the art dance studio.
Having swum in cruddy public pools since then, and changed in mildewed HS locker rooms, and tried folk dancing in “big open spaces” (which folks think means great for dancing) but with awful concrete floors-- I MUCH prefer (and got spoiled) but the athletic facilities of my college years!
And I’m the least athletic person I know- but I do like exercise occasionally!
I don’t think the U would have built a fabulous swim facility were it not for the diving and swim teams!!! And they certainly wouldn’t have spent the money to keep the facilities spotlessly clean for just the kids looking for casual exercise…
More likely, U would not have received the donation to build such a facility, now named for the donor who was likely a student-athlete. Which they would then tout in its marketing materials for prospective applicants.
As background, I wasn’t an athlete in college (I engineered more basketball and football radio broadcasts from the radio station then I saw in person).
At D3 schools, there are no sports that are money makers, so having sports is really like having another club activity for students to participate in. Who is to say that soccer is somehow less worthy than debate or theater. For some kids, having sports is their hook to find the school that fits for them and their team then becomes their friend group.
For me the presence of scholarships for non-revenue sports (TBH, really only men’s basketball and football are likely net revenue producers) really doesn’t change the equation. There is a cohort of kids that their sport is how they get to attend a 4 year school.
I don’t care that there maybe an admissions boost for athletes.
Sports that are self-supporting or profitable are likely to be football and/or men’s basketball, and then only at a small number of colleges. So at those few colleges, those sports will remain as school-sponsored sports, with enough women’s sports to fulfill Title IX purposes. While the women’s sports will cost money, they may produce a “profit” by allowing football and/or men’s basketball to exist.
It is my understanding that former college athletes across sports tend to be consistent donors after graduating - so yes, donating money that does benefit the future student body.
My dd plays a varsity sport at a D3 school. A lot of the team’s funding is from fundraising and parental support. We help offset the cost of their spring break trip that isn’t covered by their fundraising. She gets no athletic money. We pay full tuition. They don’t get new uniforms every year. Her equipment is hers - which she paid for. The student body has a lot of school spirit and shows support for their teams, just like the athletes show support for their peers in other activities.
Not quite so sure why you just focused on athletics.
The average student gets little benefit from science labs, the dance studio, the band, the Shakespeare courses. All together the college experience is enhanced by these things coming together but anyone can argue that the college would save money by doing away with the ceramics classes or the guest speaker program.
My daughter was a D2 athlete and got all those benefits - a scholarship, uniforms, travel… and she would not have gone to that school without the team and the scholarship. So what did the school get out of it? Well, it got 22-25 women it would not have otherwise had enrolled, and when a school is 75% male, those females do add to the ‘college experience’ (along with the 10 on the golf team, the 35 on the soccer team, the rowers, the softball players…) Yep, the only students watching her play were her sorority sisters (who often came as a group to watch and support her) and the boyfriends of the players. Most in the stands were parents. Yes, the parents who pay the tuition and give donations to the school. All boys’ teams had more fans in the stands.
As long as you shut down every club, every student organization, all research, and every other expense that every student doesn’t utilize. Classes, room, and food.
I’m guessing at the powerhouse football schools like Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, Michigan, etc., the revenue generated from full stadiums each week, thousands of fans eating, drinking & lodging in their college towns, not to mention the money from bowl games and donations from rabid alumni who come back year after year to go to the games, greatly benefits the university and all its students (as well as the surrounding town).
I have no data, but my observation is that colleges with sports have more loyal and active alumni who want to come back to campus on fairly regular basis to experience the atmosphere. Happy & excited alumni = financial donations. Even at colleges that aren’t on ESPN each week, sporting events give students, fans & alumni a reason to gather together (bonus points for colleges that get the surrounding college town involved in the excitement).
I graduated from a SUNY with only one sport that people cared about (hockey). After experiencing the excitement of football at southern colleges, I felt that the SUNY system missed out on not having football (a couple of the SUNY’s do have a team). Although my SUNY has alumni events, there is no central event to lure alumni back to campus - and even when we do come back, we keep to ourselves. There are no events that promote interacting with current students. Sports provide that opportunity.
I also read something fairly recently about how sports like football and basketball actually provide funding for almost all other sports at a college, some of which may not be able to continue without that money.
I only wish that women’s sports got as much fanfare as the men’s.
I don’t understand this at all. Sports provide a safe environment for kids/young adults to do something to relieve stress, learn life skills such as team building and leadership, and can be lifelong hobbies.
Well, first I think you should delineate between athletic programs that are funded by donations, ticket revenues, broadcast contracts and licensing deals (many power 5 teams) and those that are funded by other sources including student athletic fees included in the fee schedule. Some D1 schools like UVA and UNC and many D2-D3 schools charge students to help fund athletic teams. This is an old article, but it gives you an idea of the amount charged to students. I do have an personal aversion to paying thousands of dollars towards athletics, but that’s each consumer’s choice when picking a school.
@CollegeNerd67 is correct; sports make alumni happy and connected, happy and connected alumni make donations (not just to athletic program, but school as a whole); those donations help ALL students by building new facilities, creating scholarships, building endowments to help keep tuition lower. Football and basketball, along with donations/ boosters, help fund non revenue sports like track and swimming. The non revenues still contribute $ to the athletic budget through invitational meet revenue, but they also contribute to the local economies through hotels, restaurants and tourism.
@CollegeNerd67 you’d like our women’s softball vibe; new program 3 years ago, and it really exploded. Lots of support and excitement. We’re getting women’s gymnastics, so I’m excited to see what teams will come to town in the near future.
I agree. I do not resonate with the extreme focus on school sports teams (both high school and college) that is found in the United States. In most other countries in the world, athletes participate on club teams instead. The role of schools in other countries is academics, not sports. This is part of the reason tuition is less expensive, and admissions are more transparent in universities abroad. I hold this opinion despite being a former multi-sport athlete in high school and college (D3). I certainly enjoyed my time on my various school teams, but could have enjoyed a community team instead.
This is the reason. Let’s take the case of Rutgers University, for example.
Last year, RU athletic produced a deficit of more than $73 million.
And that was before it settled its class action lawsuit with the students. Rutgers sequesters 100% of the student fees to support the athletic department. Since COVID kept everyone home, the students felts like maybe they didn’t get their money’s worth. The suit cost $5 million to settle, so now last year’s deficit is at $78 million and counting.
The year prior, Rutgers’ athletic department reported a deficit of $10.6 million but when its accounting maneuvers were revealed the actual deficit was $72 million.
In fact, Rutgers accumulated deficit in the athletic department since 2004 tops more than a half billion dollars.
So yes, I agree that college sports has been at Rutgers an unnecessary drain in funds.
And let’s not forget the marching bands and pep bands who play at the sporting events. Many of these are outstanding. Google Ohio State University Marching Band. They are amazing…and wouldn’t exist except for the football games.
I went to very few sporting events when I was in college in the Stone Age. But I did go to a few football games to see the “110 Marching Men” (and yes there were women too…). The band was great. Not OSU.
We know many students who have lifelong friends or spouses from marching band.
I think it might be of interest to know that college athletes (no matter which division) are also highly sought after by potential employers. So while some people don’t get the importance of college athletics, at least their future employers do.
Demoting all college sports to the club team level, and establishing minor leagues for basketball, football (we already have them for baseball) would be an excellent idea. I’ve often said that the mission of colleges is education, not training grounds for prosports.
I agree that sports play an important role in the college experience (plus its spillover effect on alumni engagement, donations, benefit to other activities, etc). So I support having college sports.
However, I also agree with this observation:
and:
As @fiftyfifty1 said, the focus of educational institutions abroad is primarily academics, whereas here our colleges do place an inordinate amount of importance on sports to the point where at some places academics takes a secondary place. That raises the cost of college far too much because expensive facilities need to be built along with a lot of other things to support those sports.
I’m sure many will not agree with this, and that’s fine. It ultimately comes down to what we think a college’s primary purpose should be and how many $$ should be spent on that.
Again, I’m not opposed to college sports but I am certainly concerned about how much money is channeled into it.
To @oldchief78’s post about Rutgers - that’s blatant waste of money. I attended one of their football games in fall and it was very clear there is no ROI for the crazy amount of money the school is spending. Meanwhile, kids trying to get research grants are struggling.
) Lots of softball excitement at D21’s school too (VT)