Does a successful athletic program benefit Universities?

[Brains]

That's very much a relative term you just threw out there. The facts are people love the latest and greatest and big business and University football teams are no exception to the rule. This stuff has been looked at and overanalyzed for decades now. A brief history is in order.


Most sports fan knows about the “Flutie Effect.” Named after Doug Flutie, the Boston College quarterback who successfully threw a Hail Mary to beat Miami in a nationally televised game in 1984, the general idea is that college applications surge following athletic success.

The examples are virtually endless. Boston College saw a 30% jump in applications for the two years after Doug Flutie’s Hail Mary in 1984. Applications jumped 13% at Auburn after Cam Newton led them to a BCS national championship victory in 2011. And even Florida Gulf Coast saw a 27% increase in applications after advancing to the sweet 16 as a No. 15 seed in 2013.

Alabama is no different. When Nick Saban arrived at Alabama in 2007, they had a total enrollment of about 25,000 students.

That number has increased to almost 40,000 now, representing a 60% jump in enrollment and significantly outpacing the 10% increase that the average U.S. public college has seen over the same time period. An increase in total enrollment is great. It brings more money, more attention, and hopefully, more prestige to a university.

Good info

 

[Canedude08]

Stanford University has the third-largest endowment (27.7 billion before the pandemic) among all American universities. Yet, when the COVID pandemic hit their AD immediately announced in early 2020 they were eliminating 11 of 36 sports from their athletics department as they adjust to the financial realities of the global pandemic upon college athletics.

For a university like Stanford, a Power 5 member of the Pac 12 conference, to evoke such sweeping changes at the first sign of the pandemic signifies just how financially grave the current and short-term future outlook is for college athletic programs and the revenue available to maintain them.

Football success is very, very important to one and all in the grand scheme of things.

Their endowment doesn't have anything to do with their their athletic department budget. Stanford, like many schools were forced to cut sports/positions because they lost out on tons of revenue due to COVID-19, and had to balance the books. Departments have been a bit bloated for years, an adjustment was going to happen. No one is going to cut football, because that's the revenue center. That said a school like Stanford is unique in the fact that they are fine with their niche. Hence why they don't give a **** about having academic standards that limit recruiting.

 

[TemplarCane]

Notre Dame would love to be Alabama in football, they pride themselves on being the historical face of college football. However, they also take pride in their academic reputation and won’t turn the University into a football factory like the $EC (sans Vanderbilt). Like at Miami and at most D1 schools test scores for incoming football players are below your regular incoming student, but above the NCAA minimums.

Despite what Lou Holtz wanted and what Brian Kelly would like.

 

[AtlAtty]

And yet the discussion is still about how athletic success in football translates to financial success for the entire University. It's still big business and it is still about making money. Feelings of academic superiority aside.

For the University of Alabama, it isn't just that student attendance has increased exponentially. But the type of student matters much more than just a number. And translates into cold hard cash.

Not only has Alabama increased its annual enrollment by about 60%, but the overall composition of its student body has significantly changed also. For example, when Nick Saban arrived in 2007, the majority of Alabama’s freshmen class was composed of students paying in-state tuition. Today, only about 40% of the university students are from Alabama, with over 56% coming from elsewhere in the United States, and the remaining 4% is international.

That’s important for several reasons, but mostly financially. Alabama’s out-of-state enrollment increased from about 12,000 students in 2011 to more than 22,000 students in 2020.

Those students pay about 3x more in annual tutuion than an in-state student — $30,000 vs. $10,000 — which means that 10,000 additional students paying $20,000 annually is worth about $200 million to the universtiy (10,000 x $20,000 = $200M).

Fact is, Alabama will cover a portion of that through scholarships, like everyone else, but even if you take 50% of it away, that’s still $100 million. Also, don’t forget that students pay tuition annually, meaning that Alabama now reaps this ~$200 million benefits every year regardless of its athletic performance.

Not exactly as it concerns out of state tuition for Alabama.
Bama and South Carolina, the two I know of but likely more state schools, have extended in-state tuition to out of state students, at least from Georgia.

But none of the Georgia kids I know are going to Bama because of the football team. They are going because they can't get into any other school.

Sports certainly raise school exposure but there is no correlation, much less causation, of which I am aware that sports raises the academic profile of the student.

 

[AtlAtty]

Lol at academic rankings. School names don’t really matter as much outside of the top schools. If two people apply for the same job with the same skill set and experience with the big difference being one went to Miami and the other to Alabama, I can guarantee the academic ranking of those schools doesn’t even factor into the hiring decision. Now if one of them went to Harvard or duke, that’s a different story.

The names matter when applying to graduate school. If the test scores and GPA are identical, grad schools certainly favor higher "ranked" institutions. Now how we define "rankings" is a matter of interpretation.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Their endowment doesn't have anything to do with their their athletic department budget. Stanford, like many schools were forced to cut sports/positions because they lost out on tons of revenue due to COVID-19, and had to balance the books. Departments have been a bit bloated for years, an adjustment was going to happen. No one is going to cut football, because that's the revenue center. That said a school like Stanford is unique in the fact that they are fine with their niche. Hence why they don't give a **** about having academic standards that limit recruiting.

You just acknowledged that Stanford was much more invested in other sports besides football. Indeed this all-sports trophy is often found in Stanford's trophy case. They said nothing about "self-correction anyway? They specifically made reference to the COVID pandemic and the immediate money crunch that entailed. The loss of 11 different sports at a place that prides itself on diversity in sports says a lot. This is also why they have excelled over the years with their Olympic pursuits.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Not exactly as it concerns out of state tuition for Alabama.
Bama and South Carolina, the two I know of but likely more state schools, have extended in-state tuition to out of state students, at least from Georgia.

But none of the Georgia kids I know are going to Bama because of the football team. They are going because they can't get into any other school.

Sports certainly raise school exposure but there is no correlation, much less causation, of which I am aware that sports raises the academic profile of the student.

I know of specific cases where out-of-state students wanted to attend Alabama because of their football success. I had a daughter there in 2010 on a full academic ride and heard many a story just like it. I even heard Pauly, of Dan Patrick fame, tell Dan he almost went to Alabama. Which somewhat surprised Dan. So he asked why? Because of their football program, I thought it would be cool. He was from somewhere up north.

How many instate kids attend their favorite schools for exactly the same reason? Doesn't seem so far-fetched, does it?

 

[NOLACane21]

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.

My wife sees this first hand on a regular basis with some of her patients. The Gumps are dropping big duffles on more than just kids that run a 4.3 @ 230 Lbs. Will most of those kids remain in AL, post-graduation/long term? Remains to be seen but it's certainly a worthwhile gamble IME.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Notre Dame would love to be Alabama in football, they pride themselves on being the historical face of college football. However, they also take pride in their academic reputation and won’t turn the University into a football factory like the $EC (sans Vanderbilt). Like at Miami and at most D1 schools test scores for incoming football players are below your regular incoming student, but above the NCAA minimums.

Despite what Lou Holtz wanted and what Brian Kelly would like.

They were the cat's meow for decades during the bowl series era of college football. What I like to refer to as the "beauty pageant" years. They also came south, like so many B1G teams, and took elite athletes out of the south. Many of these guys are enrolling in southern schools these days, regardless of school academic standards and to be more specific, Southeastern teams. That's the biggest reason Notre Dame hasn't been on championship parade since 1988.

 

[TemplarCane]

They were the cat's meow for decades during the bowl series era of college football. What I like to refer to as the "beauty pageant" years. They also came south, like so many B1G teams, and took elite athletes out of the south. Many of these guys are enrolling in southern schools these days, regardless of school academic standards and to be more specific, Southeastern teams. That's the biggest reason Notre Dame hasn't been on championship parade since 1988.

As much as I dislike the arrogance of ND, the program has been the face of college football for over 100 years. They've had periods of poor records, but seemed to rebound, winning NCs as early as 1924 and as late as 1988. Time may have seemed to pass them by, like Miami, but they've overcome a series of bad coaching hires since Lou Holtz retired and found Brian Kelly. Miami hasn't found their Kelly. With the right HC they should be a consistent Top 10 program. Like Miami should be.

They can still survive being an independent, still recruit nationally, and still travel extremely well. Go to an USC-ND game in LA and you'd swear half the crowd was wearing gold and green.

But seriously, F-ND.

 

[Empirical Cane]

My wife sees this first hand on a regular basis with some of her patients. The Gumps are dropping big duffles on more than just kids that run a 4.3 @ 230 Lbs. Will most of those kids remain in AL, post-graduation/long term? Remains to be seen but it's certainly a worthwhile gamble IME.

They are taking a very human approach to it.

Nerd (I say lovingly) comes to Bama with academic bag$$$$.

Meets fellow student who is from Bama.

They bang nasty with chemistry books amd pocket protectors flung across the lab in wild lustful abandon.

Now you have created a draw/pressure to stay in the Heart of Dixie.

 

[90scane]

Yes when the school can increase enrollment. No when the school is land locked with no reason to increase enrollment.

 

[Canedude08]

You just acknowledged that Stanford was much more invested in other sports besides football. Indeed this all-sports trophy is often found in Stanford's trophy case. They said nothing about "self-correction anyway? They specifically made reference to the COVID pandemic and the immediate money crunch that entailed. The loss of 11 different sports at a place that prides itself on diversity in sports says a lot. This is also why they have excelled over the years with their Olympic pursuits.

Those sports depend on revenue from the revenue sports to stay afloat. Some of their more popular sports do have passionate donors(their volleyball programs have a ton of support from their volleyball alumni, a lot of whom went on to Silicon Valley), but if Stanford football and basketball aren't pulling in sufficient revenue, it hurts some of the Olympic sports.

 

[SayWhat]

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.

Just to piggy back off this post, I've been saying it for years, we should put money where it can be used most. That's in basketball. Far more bang for your buck with less overhead, like Duke.

People don't like to hear that, but hire a big *** name and watch the recruits flood in. There are many good basketball programs that do well that parallel our student body size.

How many small schools like us do well in football? The costs in comparison are massive.

 

[kkinder94]

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.

I help clients plan for paying for college. I can speak to Alabama. They have been brilliant in using their football cash to improve their academics. They offer lots of merit aid to out of state students with good academic credentials. The university ends up getting top students who still pay more than in-state Alabama students. Academic reputation goes up and revenue per student increases, which they then use to boost football even more and keeps the cycle moving.

 

[Oicu812]

The kind of people that write huge checks to Universities for the academic side don't care that much about what the team does.

A University is like a family on a food budget. College athletics is that 200 dollar bottle of wine you keep in the pantry or some high end scotch. Yes, it's nice to have when company comes over, but you don't want to blow your entire food budget on it. Schools like Alabama, Clemson and others have an empty pantry, but that super nice bottle of wine. Miami has Dewar's, but a full pantry.

Just cause....curious minds want to know....Stat guys...what was our revenue sales increase,(from football relatedcontracts ntracts).from 2 yrs prior to Mark richt,..to now? Just curious how much difference there is from this amount of improvement.
I think those numbers may be higher than some think, as well

 

[Canedude08]

Just cause....curious minds want to know....Stat guys...what was our revenue sales increase,(from football relatedcontracts ntracts).from 2 yrs prior to Mark richt,..to now? Just curious how much difference there is from this amount of improvement.
I think those numbers may be higher than some think, as well

The numbers are a matter of public record, you can go over to the Department of Education website and look. The problem is that 1) Miami doesn't have a fanbase that spends money, by purchasing a ticket, or by donating to the Hurricane Club. Hence why Miami is usually somewhere in the 30s at best in regards to revenue. Think about the following: Miami, even when times were great rarely sold out the Orange Bowl.

 

[Canedude08]

Just to piggy back off this post, I've been saying it for years, we should put money where it can be used most. That's in basketball. Far more bang for your buck with less overhead, like Duke.

People don't like to hear that, but hire a big *** name and watch the recruits flood in. There are many good basketball programs that do well that parallel our student body size.

How many small schools like us do well in football? The costs in comparison are massive.

You only need a couple of high end guys to have a legit basketball team(You can then surround them with role players), football, you need a minimum of 40-50 guys that are worth a **** to even be competitive.

 

[CTCANE]

I attended UM from 82-85. The year after we won National Championship #1, students had to be housed across the street as enrollment really increased. That was when tuition and room and board was $12000 a year, not $65000 a year.

 

[Canedude08]

I attended UM from 82-85. The year after we won National Championship #1, students had to be housed across the street as enrollment really increased. That was when tuition and room and board was $12000 a year, not $65000 a year.

That was also when they were renovating the towers and the other residential colleges, so on campus housing was pretty sparse. The undergrad population has held around 10k for at least 30 years.