Does a successful athletic program benefit Universities?

[ssvir]

UM increased its academic profile as a result of the football success in the 80s/90s/2000s and has fallen off some recently in academic prestige. How much is b/c the football team has been so mediocre? Both Bama and UGA have had huge influxes of applications and as a result have been steadily rising in the academic rankings to the point where UGA has passed Miami. Being cheap on football spending is hurting UM in more ways than just donations, ticket sales, and athletic department revenues.

The Flutie Effect: How Athletic Success Boosts College Applications

When a school rises from mediocre to great on the football field, applications increase by 18.7 percent.

www.forbes.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/sports/ncaa-applicants/

Alabama Football: Many benefits from a successful sports program

Alabama football generates big revenue and drives significant added benefits to the university's stature and appeal to future students and alumni.

bamahammer.com

Why a successful football program benefits a university in ways money can't buy

It's a good time for Temple football. In fact, it's a better time to be an Owl than it's been in decades -- perhaps ever. Over the past two seasons, the Owls

footballscoop.com

There are countless other articles.

 

[Canedude08]

UM increased its academic profile as a result of the football success in the 80s/90s/2000s and has fallen off some recently in academic prestige. How much is b/c the football team has been so mediocre? Both Bama and UGA have had huge influxes of applications and as a result have been steadily rising in the academic rankings to the point where UGA has passed Miami. Being cheap on football spending is hurting UM in more ways than just donations, ticket sales, and athletic department revenues.

The Flutie Effect: How Athletic Success Boosts College Applications

When a school rises from mediocre to great on the football field, applications increase by 18.7 percent.

www.forbes.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/sports/ncaa-applicants/

Alabama Football: Many benefits from a successful sports program

Alabama football generates big revenue and drives significant added benefits to the university's stature and appeal to future students and alumni.

bamahammer.com

Why a successful football program benefits a university in ways money can't buy

It's a good time for Temple football. In fact, it's a better time to be an Owl than it's been in decades -- perhaps ever. Over the past two seasons, the Owls

footballscoop.com

There are countless other articles.

UGA has passed Miami, in the US News and World Report rankings, the most useless rankings in existence. We've seen numerous times how those ranks can and do get gamed, mostly because the criteria has little to do with academic relevance or rigor. In other words, you are in the middle of a huge fundraising drive? You get bumped up. You play games with your admissions department to fudge your yield numbers? That's fine, here, have some rank points. I got curious and pulled up the Wall Street Journal rankings, you know, the ones formulated to do more than sell overpriced magazines and....

Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education College Rankings 2021

The Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education College Rankings, based on 15 performance indicators, is designed to answer the questions that matter most to students and their families: How likely am I to graduate, pay off my loans and get a good job? Does the college have plenty of resources to...

www.timeshighereducation.com

53: University of Miami

149th: University of Georgia

401-500: University of Alabama

By the way, of course a Bama centric rag would hype this up, they don't want to admit that their single minded emphasis on football actively screws over the 99% of the school that doesn't play, nor truly benefit from that program winning outside of having some fun fall Saturdays. Athletic departments love to push this narrative, because they need an excuse to justify their existence, although it's been shown time and time again that the elite schools are mostly out of the major college sports business. Think about it, outside of us, Southern Cal and Notre Dame, think of another top 100 private institution that has had consistent, championship level success in the sport in the last 40 years. Even when you look at the state schools that are well thought of in the top 100 of the rankings, they are few and far between. For every Michigan, for every Florida, there are bottom feeders like Clemson. Schools like Purdue and Georgia Tech are **** good, they are also rans in regards to sports. Ever notice that the top 100 institutions, look nothing like the AP Top 25? There's a reason why.

 

[RVACane]

I think the success of the football program brought in money and applications and helped for certain.

 

[Canedude08]

I think the success of the football program brought in money and applications and helped for certain.

It helped, but the impact has been overstated for decades by people who honestly don't have a **** clue what they are talking about, or are people that want to push a narrative.

Miami's rise as a school is more a result of the city's rise than the football program finding success. People forget that prior to the late 70s, the City of Miami and South Florida in general was closer to Birmingham, Alabama than LA, or NYC. There was little corporate money in the area, it was a place where old people came to die. As Miami started to expand(We can argue why the city started to expand, and whether that expansion was based on legal industries, hint: it wasn't), and corporations started viewing the city as the "Gateway to the Americas", people like Tad Foote and his development staff started getting their hooks into the corporations as the region's major University. They were able to fundraise based on that. That it happened to happen at the same time as the "Decade of Dominance" is coincidental. Frankly, there's a reason why Foote and Jimmy didn't get along, because Jimmy wanted Miami to be more of a jock school(Keep in mind, Jimmy spent the bulk of his collegiate coaching career coaching at places like OU and Arkansas), it made his life a lot easier, and Foote couldn't go along with that, because he had to answer to those donors and stakeholders that weren't going to go for that.

Dr. Shalala came along and continued what Foote and his staff had done, although she took it to a higher level, because she was able to use her immense political connections to forge new donor paths, there's a reason why the lady was able to raise BILLIONS for the University. Plural. BILLIONS.

People like the Millers aren't writing seven, eight and nine figure checks to the University, based on whether some random dude caught a pass, or tackled someone.

 

[Dwinstitles]

UM increased its academic profile as a result of the football success in the 80s/90s/2000s and has fallen off some recently in academic prestige. How much is b/c the football team has been so mediocre? Both Bama and UGA have had huge influxes of applications and as a result have been steadily rising in the academic rankings to the point where UGA has passed Miami. Being cheap on football spending is hurting UM in more ways than just donations, ticket sales, and athletic department revenues.

The Flutie Effect: How Athletic Success Boosts College Applications

When a school rises from mediocre to great on the football field, applications increase by 18.7 percent.

www.forbes.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/sports/ncaa-applicants/

Alabama Football: Many benefits from a successful sports program

Alabama football generates big revenue and drives significant added benefits to the university's stature and appeal to future students and alumni.

bamahammer.com

Why a successful football program benefits a university in ways money can't buy

It's a good time for Temple football. In fact, it's a better time to be an Owl than it's been in decades -- perhaps ever. Over the past two seasons, the Owls

footballscoop.com

There are countless other articles.

Kids apply at Bama cause of the star players they will meet. I had a doctor tell me specifically he chose Miami cause of the players in the 80's and 90's they were super stars. He said alot of his friends did to

 

[Canedude08]

Kids apply at Bama cause of the star players they will meet. I had a doctor tell me specifically he chose Miami cause of the players in the 80's and 90's they were super stars. He said alot of his friends did to

Yep, kids are willing to potentially go into six figure debt, so they can possibly meet a football player maybe once or twice in their four years at the institution. Alabama has over 30,000 students, that means that the 85 scholarship student athletes make up around .26% of the student body. In other words, it's very likely that you will never take a class with, nor seriously interact with a football student athlete at a place like Alabama, unless you are plugged into certain social circles, and even then, it'll be passing at best. Never mind the fact that a significant percentage of the kids at a place like Bama see the mostly Black student-athletes as subhuman off the field, that is unless they are winning games. Yep, makes a ton of sense.

Keep in mind, at a place like Miami, the student-body doesn't really give a **** about the student athletes, even when times are good. It's a small private school, the only time you even notice the student athletes is on syllabus day, and you make determinations about the class based on how many student athletes are in the room. The biggest fans are the people in the city, hence why when you talk to the old school 'Canes, their stories are mostly about meeting celebrities and hanging out in places where the typical undergrad can't get in.

 

[RVACane]

It helped, but the impact has been overstated for decades by people who honestly don't have a **** clue what they are talking about, or are people that want to push a narrative.

Miami's rise as a school is more a result of the city's rise than the football program finding success. People forget that prior to the late 70s, the City of Miami and South Florida in general was closer to Birmingham, Alabama than LA, or NYC. There was little corporate money in the area, it was a place where old people came to die. As Miami started to expand(We can argue why the city started to expand, and whether that expansion was based on legal industries, hint: it wasn't), and corporations started viewing the city as the "Gateway to the Americas", people like Tad Foote and his development staff started getting their hooks into the corporations as the region's major University. They were able to fundraise based on that. That it happened to happen at the same time as the "Decade of Dominance" is coincidental. Frankly, there's a reason why Foote and Jimmy didn't get along, because Jimmy wanted Miami to be more of a jock school(Keep in mind, Jimmy spent the bulk of his collegiate coaching career coaching at places like OU and Arkansas), it made his life a lot easier, and Foote couldn't go along with that, because he had to answer to those donors and stakeholders that weren't going to go for that.

Dr. Shalala came along and continued what Foote and his staff had done, although she took it to a higher level, because she was able to use her immense political connections to forge new donor paths, there's a reason why the lady was able to raise BILLIONS for the University. Plural. BILLIONS.

People like the Millers aren't writing seven, eight and nine figure checks to the University, based on whether some random dude caught a pass, or tackled someone.

That’s a lot of information. I know a little bit about the history including that Leonard & Sue Miller’s generosity to the school had nothing to do with building up athletics - I can say that firsthand.

That’s not my point though. My point is that there are promotional benefits of a successful program but correct - football in and of itself doesn’t take Miami anywhere near the academic level Donna Shalala got us to or make our mega-donors decide to donate in the first place.

 

[Dwinstitles]

Yep, kids are willing to potentially go into six figure debt, so they can possibly meet a football player maybe once or twice in their four years at the institution. Alabama has over 30,000 students, that means that the 85 scholarship student athletes make up around .26% of the student body. In other words, it's very likely that you will never take a class with, nor seriously interact with a football student athlete at a place like Alabama, unless you are plugged into certain social circles, and even then, it'll be passing at best. Never mind the fact that a significant percentage of the kids at a place like Bama see the mostly Black student-athletes as subhuman off the field, that is unless they are winning games. Yep, makes a ton of sense.

Keep in mind, at a place like Miami, the student-body doesn't really give a **** about the student athletes, even when times are good. It's a small private school, the only time you even notice the student athletes is on syllabus day, and you make determinations about the class based on how many student athletes are in the room. The biggest fans are the people in the city, hence why when you talk to the old school 'Canes, their stories are mostly about meeting celebrities and hanging out in places where the typical undergrad can't get in.

Just saying what that doctor told me

 

[JD08]

There's no arguing that success in any sport, with football being the most visible, raises the profile of the school.

 

[RVACane]

There's no arguing that success in any sport, with football being the most visible, raises the profile of the school.

Clemson would probably be a good example of that.

 

[Empirical Cane]

Also an interesting point:

Bama is using SEC-like recruiting for 1550-1600 SAT scorers.

Full rides (even out of state), stipends, etc.

They rollin the academic bag game too.

Very clever long-term strategy for the State.

 

[HurricaneAce07]

Pretty sure Julio Frenk is on record stating that applications to UM went up by multiples (2-3x) immediately after college gameday was on campus for the 2017 Notre Dame game. It's free marketing for the university and the deeper your application pool is, the better the university tends to grade from an academic standpoint.

I'll use myself as an example - in 2003 I had to choose between UNC, UVA and Miami. All three were solid academic schools, my dad was a UNC alum and I really liked UVA. However, there was something "different" about Miami and part of that was my exposure and experience watching the football team. Might be silly, but it definitely makes a difference for those that enjoy college sports/football.

 

[HurricaneHauk]

Obviously

 

[423Hurricane]

Many students, including the average Joe, want to be part of a winning campus culture. A successful football program being the most visible on most campuses these days would no doubt attract more students.

 

[ssvir]

UGA has passed Miami, in the US News and World Report rankings, the most useless rankings in existence. We've seen numerous times how those ranks can and do get gamed, mostly because the criteria has little to do with academic relevance or rigor. In other words, you are in the middle of a huge fundraising drive? You get bumped up. You play games with your admissions department to fudge your yield numbers? That's fine, here, have some rank points. I got curious and pulled up the Wall Street Journal rankings, you know, the ones formulated to do more than sell overpriced magazines and....

Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education College Rankings 2021

The Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education College Rankings, based on 15 performance indicators, is designed to answer the questions that matter most to students and their families: How likely am I to graduate, pay off my loans and get a good job? Does the college have plenty of resources to...

www.timeshighereducation.com

53: University of Miami

149th: University of Georgia

401-500: University of Alabama

By the way, of course a Bama centric rag would hype this up, they don't want to admit that their single minded emphasis on football actively screws over the 99% of the school that doesn't play, nor truly benefit from that program winning outside of having some fun fall Saturdays. Athletic departments love to push this narrative, because they need an excuse to justify their existence, although it's been shown time and time again that the elite schools are mostly out of the major college sports business. Think about it, outside of us, Southern Cal and Notre Dame, think of another top 100 private institution that has had consistent, championship level success in the sport in the last 40 years. Even when you look at the state schools that are well thought of in the top 100 of the rankings, they are few and far between. For every Michigan, for every Florida, there are bottom feeders like Clemson. Schools like Purdue and Georgia Tech are **** good, they are also rans in regards to sports. Ever notice that the top 100 institutions, look nothing like the AP Top 25? There's a reason why.

The guy who thinks he's the smartest in the room ignores the articles and turns his assumptions into facts.

The FACT is that teams that have had successful football teams over the last 30 years have see dramatic increases in applications, awareness, donations, and overall interest. The cycle repeats itself over and over again from Bama/UGA/Clemson currently to schools like Miami/BC/Syracuse etc back in the day.

Your attempt to pivot the original argument is just typical spin doctor bull****. I'd be willing to bet you are either a lawyer or an "academic" b/c nobody that lives in the real world would argue against the FACTS.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Also an interesting point:

Bama is using SEC-like recruiting for 1550-1600 SAT scorers.

Full rides (even out of state), stipends, etc.

They rollin the academic bag game too.

Very clever long-term strategy for the State.

Our starting QB is also now a millionaire through NIL. If you are a University and you still don't understand the art of big business you are destined for failure.

 

[NVA CANE]

Successful sports programs, specifically football and basketball have always positively impacted universities. It’s a great tool to use to boost your university regarding applications, donations, etc.

The exceptions are the Ivy League schools, Harvard, etc.

Duke is considered a great academic school and their basketball program hasn’t dulled their academic standing. It’s given the school more exposure.
Investing heavily in your football and basketball programs is a no brainer except evidently for the administration at the university of Miami.

 

[Canedude08]

The guy who thinks he's the smartest in the room ignores the articles and turns his assumptions into facts.

The FACT is that teams that have had successful football teams over the last 30 years have see dramatic increases in applications, awareness, donations, and overall interest. The cycle repeats itself over and over again from Bama/UGA/Clemson currently to schools like Miami/BC/Syracuse etc back in the day.

Your attempt to pivot the original argument is just typical spin doctor bull****. I'd be willing to bet you are either a lawyer or an "academic" b/c nobody that lives in the real world would argue against the FACTS.

What facts? I showed you the numbers. Alabama has been winning for over a decade, winning in a way none of us have ever seen before, and they are still over 300 schools behind Miami. Go look at the top 100 of the WSJ rankings, a lot of those schools haven't won anything in football in decades, if ever. In fact, a lot of those schools don't even try to play FBS football or D-1 sports in general. Outside of Michigan, Texas, and Florida, schools with such large alumni/donor bases that they can easily be top tier in both areas, a lot of schools in that top 100 nationally are schools that are also rans in athletics, if they even try to participate. Why? Because to quote the late Beano Cook "You can bankrupt yourself trying to win in football. You can completely destroy a school by going all in in football". College athletics, especially at the higher level basically requires insane fundraising, fundraising that gets spent down to the penny by the department. That's why a school like Texas, who actually cuts a check back to the University is so rare.

By the way, for those saying "Well those applications create interest". Yes, it does, and you can fudge your acceptance numbers by having a ton of kids you'll never accept apply, which makes you look selective. USNWR has that in their ranking algorithm, which again doesn't measure a **** thing about what goes on in the classroom. They also include alumni giving, which again, doesn't mean a **** thing in regards to academic rigor.

Someone earlier pointed out Clemson as some kind of case study.

Clemson's rank is 189th. They were a regional school before they started winning, they are still a regional school.
Auburn is 243rd.
LSU is 264th


Amazing how winning and success hasn't done much to lift those schools, while schools like Northwestern and Syracuse continue to be near the top, despite barely being relevant in football for decades on end.

 

[RVACane]

What facts? I showed you the numbers. Alabama has been winning for over a decade, winning in a way none of us have ever seen before, and they are still over 300 schools behind Miami. Go look at the top 100 of the WSJ rankings, a lot of those schools haven't won anything in football in decades, if ever. In fact, a lot of those schools don't even try to play FBS football or D-1 sports in general. Outside of Michigan, Texas, and Florida, schools with such large alumni/donor bases that they can easily be top tier in both areas, a lot of schools in that top 100 nationally are schools that are also rans in athletics, if they even try to participate. Why? Because to quote the late Beano Cook "You can bankrupt yourself trying to win in football. You can completely destroy a school by going all in in football". College athletics, especially at the higher level basically requires insane fundraising, fundraising that gets spent down to the penny by the department. That's why a school like Texas, who actually cuts a check back to the University is so rare.

By the way, for those saying "Well those applications create interest". Yes, it does, and you can fudge your acceptance numbers by having a ton of kids you'll never accept apply, which makes you look selective. USNWR has that in their ranking algorithm, which again doesn't measure a **** thing about what goes on in the classroom. They also include alumni giving, which again, doesn't mean a **** thing in regards to academic rigor.

Someone earlier pointed out Clemson as some kind of case study.

Clemson's rank is 189th. They were a regional school before they started winning, they are still a regional school.
Auburn is 243rd.
LSU is 264th


Amazing how winning and success hasn't done much to lift those schools, while schools like Northwestern and Syracuse continue to be near the top, despite barely being relevant in football for decades on end.

If you knew some of the people who you’re lecturing to on here on certain things, it would be even more entertaining.

I don’t know shît about Clemson but since I threw it out there, I looked - their applications increased 86% between 2008-2018. Is that par with every other school? As for Bama, like Clemson, the interest in those schools is definitely up with their programs. Doesn’t mean they’ve capitalized on it academically.

 

[JD08]

What facts? I showed you the numbers. Alabama has been winning for over a decade, winning in a way none of us have ever seen before, and they are still over 300 schools behind Miami. Go look at the top 100 of the WSJ rankings, a lot of those schools haven't won anything in football in decades, if ever. In fact, a lot of those schools don't even try to play FBS football or D-1 sports in general. Outside of Michigan, Texas, and Florida, schools with such large alumni/donor bases that they can easily be top tier in both areas, a lot of schools in that top 100 nationally are schools that are also rans in athletics, if they even try to participate. Why? Because to quote the late Beano Cook "You can bankrupt yourself trying to win in football. You can completely destroy a school by going all in in football". College athletics, especially at the higher level basically requires insane fundraising, fundraising that gets spent down to the penny by the department. That's why a school like Texas, who actually cuts a check back to the University is so rare.

By the way, for those saying "Well those applications create interest". Yes, it does, and you can fudge your acceptance numbers by having a ton of kids you'll never accept apply, which makes you look selective. USNWR has that in their ranking algorithm, which again doesn't measure a **** thing about what goes on in the classroom. They also include alumni giving, which again, doesn't mean a **** thing in regards to academic rigor.

Someone earlier pointed out Clemson as some kind of case study.

Clemson's rank is 189th. They were a regional school before they started winning, they are still a regional school.
Auburn is 243rd.
LSU is 264th


Amazing how winning and success hasn't done much to lift those schools, while schools like Northwestern and Syracuse continue to be near the top, despite barely being relevant in football for decades on end.

Just like everything else, there's a point of diminishing returns.