Theoretical Question...

[611116]

IF (now this is a big IF) you were an AD and had to decide (in a tight budget situation) to either continue to pump departmental money into a waning program, or trim it to it's bare bones and concentrate on the revenue sports that were actually making money... How far could you trim a revenue program and still have it technically viable?

1. Could you drop all TV and radio broadcasts?
2. Could you hire a part-time coach?
3. Could you play in a facility that had virtually no seating?
4. Could you have a roster entirely made up of walk-ons?
5. Could you become an independent?

Could you combine any of the above options? What does the Ivy League do? Do they broadcast? What kind of seating capacity does the average Ivy team have in their facility? Are the facilities on campus? Do the athletic departments make any money? If so, how do they do it?

There are lots of examples of DI revenue sports that are awful, yet still exist (i.e. Duke football, Prairie View basketball, William and Mary basketball). How do they do it? Is it all donor-related? I know of some revenue sports that have gone the way of the dinosaur due to lack of revenue, but these examples are few and far between. What keeps them afloat?

[STKohls]

Most of the options you cite would cost money, not save money. TV and Radio bring in money, the facilities are usually already built and/or multi-purpose, and the conference affiliation also brings in money. Coaches would be paid a lot less than at the big time schools, but I don't think 'part time' would be an accurate description.

Non-revenue producing sports are treated the same way at an Ivy League School than they are at UC. They have tight budgets, and do what they can to raise money, many times with the help of the athletes. The Ivies also don't offer athletic scholarships - not that it saves money for the athletic department.

Of course, when you're talking about the Ivies, you're talking about 8 of the highest endowment universities in the country. They usually have money if they need it.

[MikeInClifton]

Moved to the General forum since it is not basketball specific.

[bearcated]

Most athletic departments in most D1 schools lose money.

[ralph1950]

In theory your question makes no sense at all.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

In theory your question makes no sense at all.

I agree, Nancy Z - the value of the degree is drive by the school's educational reputation, not its athletic successes or failures.

[ralph1950]

I agree, Nancy Z - the value of the degree is drive by the school's educational reputation, not its athletic successes or failures.

Your response makes no sense at all.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Your response makes no sense at all.

It makes as much sense as anything Nancy Z has done, hence the reference to her in my reply (to yours).

[611116]

In theory your question makes no sense at all.

Firenancy--I know you can't stand me...but why the personal attacks?

This question has nothing to do with UC..It was aimed at understanding the economics of revenue sports and their relationship to the educational institutions that house them. How do programs that historically don't win stay viable?

I know that I beat up on your gal frequently, but she's a public figure and it goes with the territory. I attack those that support her based on her actions--but I've never implied that her supporters are personally reprehensible, or less than intelligent.

Your acrimony is unwarranted in this instance.

[611116]

Most athletic departments in most D1 schools lose money.

How do they stay viable?

[ralph1950]

How do they stay viable?

Fuzzy math.

[iamspen]

Fuzzy math.

Yes and no. Universities know that, even though they lose money according to the math, they make it up because sports bring exposure and publicity, as well as keeping the rich alumni donors happy.

[611116]

Yes and no. Universities know that, even though they lose money according to the math, they make it up because sports bring exposure and publicity, as well as keeping the rich alumni donors happy.

So it's the indirect influence on donations that keeps even awful programs viable...that truly is amazing. It's also a testament to the value of DI sports to the functioning of a University. Apparently, it is to the benefit of the University as a whole to support DI athletic and keep the alumni happy in as many ways as possible!

That is perhaps an object lesson for UC right now...