American Athletic Conference

[MoValley John]

You won't get an argument from me on that. In fact, schools might actually still benefit from an athletic department that is losing money. It's simple game-theory stuff. Maybe a school loses $1 million a year to athletics, but without athletics loses far greater alumni support and potential students to the in-state schools that do have athletics. That extra money will funnel over to Iowa and Iowa State in your example. UNI loses out worse than it does even if it is losing money on athletics, and Iowa and Iowa State get extra money.

I wasn't trying to argue with your original point. I was agreeing with the premise that we shouldn't trust any of the numbers. Successful programs don't want to show a profit, so the expense has a higher cost per student for tuition than a typical academic scholarship. A school has the ability to discount the tuition and not show it as a 1:1 cost in the budget for academic scholarships. Yet, in athletics the cost is reported as full-tuition and it is paid for fully. Successful programs get the benefit of higher costs to prevent a profit. Programs in the red are worse for it because they don't have the ability to show marginal cost expenses like you explained. It's all misleading and meant to benefit the most successful programs.

Exactly.

It would be interesting to see just how much money UAB football funnels into the academic side and how much money UAB is really costing the school. The last people in the world that want to see the actual figures are people aligned with the Crimson Tide. People may think that a little program like UAB doesn't bother a giant like Alabama, but you would be wrong. There is little more upsetting to the University of Nebraska than a strong and vibrant UNO. The Iowa schools are intimidated by UNI, and make no mistake, KU would like nothing more than to relegate Wichita State to D-2 or NAIA.

[Shocker-maniac]

I think an interesting case study is the University of Hawaii. Recent reports have stated that they are very close to not being able to financially sustain football. I would imagine that there is no political pressure for this like there is in the UAB/Roll Tide case. Obviously Hawaii is unique because of their travel costs are significantly higher. I think we are on the brink of seeing a number of football programs outside the P5 that will no longer be financially sustainable.

[MoValley John]

I think this might be true for the P5 schools. However, outside the P5 with very few exceptions the athletic programs are operating in the red, the net-net for the university is negative. Basically the only thing that the university is gaining are the intangibles such as alumni relations and the student experience of football in the fall.

They are adding hundreds of student athletes to the student census. They are getting full frieght for tuition, they are getting, even at smaller schools, promotional value, they are getting "diversity", they are getting facilities, built and paid for through athletics, that are used for academics as well, they are getting a lot.

NAIA schools get even more. All NAIA schools are "net" scholarships. In some instances, they will recruit 50 players to fill 15 roster spots. They get the three or four players they really want and the rest are brought in as "athletes" but really just increase enrollment and tuiution revenue. They do exactly this at Midland Lutheran in Fremont, Nebraska. They have over 50 baseball players and well over a hundred football players, all on partial scholarship.

[MoValley John]

I think an interesting case study is the University of Hawaii. Recent reports have stated that they are very close to not being able to financially sustain football. I would imagine that there is no political pressure for this like there is in the UAB/Roll Tide case. Obviously Hawaii is unique because of their travel costs are significantly higher. I think we are on the brink of seeing a number of football programs outside the P5 that will no longer be financially sustainable.

Yeah, Hawaii is unique. How they even field teams is beyond me.

[Shocker-maniac]

I can see that the NAIA scheme could work very well especially where they keep overhead very low in terms of travel, salaries, etc. My comments were directed towards the FBS side of D1. In order to compete, the costs are much higher. Most of these athletic budgets are funded by student fees and if the program is not successful donations from alumni will be low. Schools that fund their athletic programs by student fees run the risk of pricing the themselves out of the market in order to feed the beast.

[MoValley John]

... My comments were directed towards the FBS side of D1. In order to compete, the costs are much higher. Most of these athletic budgets are funded by student fees and if the program is not successful donations from alumni will be low. Schools that fund their athletic programs by student fees run the risk of pricing the themselves out of the market in order to feed the beast.

That can happen, and I get it. My point is that in many cases, where athletic losses seem to be astronomical, many times, they are losing money, but not the buckets of money that appears. Those student fees that get transferred to the athletic department, unless earmarked for building and infrastructure, come right back to academics in the form of scholarship tuition. Yes, the additional costs of student athletes attending a school increases costs on the academic side, but really only marginally. On the other side of the equation, there are arenas, stadiums and practice facilities built. All of those costs are directed solely to athletics, but in most cases, they also serve the student body as classrooms, weight rooms, recreation areas and venues for intramural sports. All parts of student life that would still need facilities constructed and maintained regardless of the school having an athletic department.

Yes, some schools bleed money trying to compete at FCS football, yes, FCS football is a money hole, but if the actual impact were calculated, it would be less of a bleed. I'm sure, even at Wichita State, students not on the basketball team have had the opportunity to play a pick up game or two at Koch Arena. I'm sure the average student gets to use the bowling lanes used by the bowling team. I'm sure there has been a class or two taught at a facility, funded by athletics and I'm pretty sure, beyond being allowed to attend games and the morale of being associated with a winning team brings, most, if not all students at Wichita State have benefitted I many other ways from the athletic program. The same can be said of all schools across the country. I just wish, that when the viability or profitability of a program was being evaluated, the entire story were told, not just a left and right side of a balance sheet. Maybe every time a weight training course was taught using the athletics department weight room, the athletics department should charge the school rent. Every time a physics instructor chooses to use the school's arena or stadium for a demonstration or experiment, maybe he should have to pay the athletic department rent. Maybe the student life office should have to pay the athletic department for the use of the facilities to conduct intramurals. On the flip side, the athletic department has to pay 100% of tuition costs to bring in a student athlete. When conducting these feasibility studies, it would be nice if all real costs were included and also that all real benefits were monetized and used in consideration.

[Jatrain]

That can happen, and I get it. My point is that in many cases, where athletic losses seem to be astronomical, many times, they are losing money, but not the buckets of money that appears. Those student fees that get transferred to the athletic department, unless earmarked for building and infrastructure, come right back to academics in the form of scholarship tuition. Yes, the additional costs of student athletes attending a school increases costs on the academic side, but really only marginally. On the other side of the equation, there are arenas, stadiums and practice facilities built. All of those costs are directed solely to athletics, but in most cases, they also serve the student body as classrooms, weight rooms, recreation areas and venues for intramural sports. All parts of student life that would still need facilities constructed and maintained regardless of the school having an athletic department.

Yes, some schools bleed money trying to compete at FCS football, yes, FCS football is a money hole, but if the actual impact were calculated, it would be less of a bleed. I'm sure, even at Wichita State, students not on the basketball team have had the opportunity to play a pick up game or two at Koch Arena. I'm sure the average student gets to use the bowling lanes used by the bowling team. I'm sure there has been a class or two taught at a facility, funded by athletics and I'm pretty sure, beyond being allowed to attend games and the morale of being associated with a winning team brings, most, if not all students at Wichita State have benefitted I many other ways from the athletic program. The same can be said of all schools across the country. I just wish, that when the viability or profitability of a program was being evaluated, the entire story were told, not just a left and right side of a balance sheet. Maybe every time a weight training course was taught using the athletics department weight room, the athletics department should charge the school rent. Every time a physics instructor chooses to use the school's arena or stadium for a demonstration or experiment, maybe he should have to pay the athletic department rent. Maybe the student life office should have to pay the athletic department for the use of the facilities to conduct intramurals. On the flip side, the athletic department has to pay 100% of tuition costs to bring in a student athlete. When conducting these feasibility studies, it would be nice if all real costs were included and also that all real benefits were monetized and used in consideration.

Regarding facility use, is that not how it usually works? I can only speak to my experiences at KU but the different departments control their own facilities and charge each other for their use. At Recreation Services we would pay the AD to use Allen or Anshutz for intramural finals, they do the same to rent the student rec for summer youth camps. The School of Ed controls Robinson, where the pool is located, I believe that both Rec Services and the AD pay for the use of the pool (not 100% on the AD part as they have paid for past renovations but I know they have to clear scheduling through the School of Ed). The AD doesn't share most of its facilities (weight rooms, fields/ courts, etc) at all.

[MoValley John]

Regarding facility use, is that not how it usually works? I can only speak to my experiences at KU but the different departments control their own facilities and charge each other for their use. At Recreation Services we would pay the AD to use Allen or Anshutz for intramural finals, they do the same to rent the student rec for summer youth camps. The School of Ed controls Robinson, where the pool is located, I believe that both Rec Services and the AD pay for the use of the pool (not 100% on the AD part as they have paid for past renovations but I know they have to clear scheduling through the School of Ed). The AD doesn't share most of its facilities (weight rooms, fields/ courts, etc) at all.

I don't know how they do it everywhere. I went to a private, NCAA D-3 school in Illinois. I never attended a single sporting event. I did use the athletic facilities. As I said, it was a private, Catholic school, so they weren't charging rent back and forth. Moving to Omaha, one of my neighbor's is an athletic administrator at UNO, UNO does not rent their facilities to student life, the facilities are simply open for use when athletics is not using them. Athletics not being credited for what they actually bring to a university was a source of his frustration when UNO cut wrestling and football.

Three weeks ago, as part of my 4th grade son's field trip to Lincoln, we toured Nebraska's facilities. They made a point of highlighting the academic impact that their athletic facilities play at the University. The only athlete exclusive weigh rooms are for football, men's and women's basketball, and baseball and softball. All other weight rooms are shared by athletes and students alike. There are blocks of time when students are allowed to lift and times when athletes get to lift. The most recent football stadium expansion included classrooms used by the university. Intramurals use the facilities free of charge. As I said, this was a point they emphasized during the tour. I don't know how every university allocates funds and tracks revenue and expenses, I just hope that when decisions regarding "viability" are made, the whole economic impact is considered.

[pogo]

I would be willing to bet that the football team weight room is superior to any of the others and has more equipment per student athlete than any others as well.

[MoValley John]

I would be willing to bet that the football team weight room is superior to any of the others and has more equipment per student athlete than any others as well.

Well, you can land 747 in the Nebraska football weight room. It does, however, take a special pilot to get it back off the ground.

[wusphlash]

Conference USA Won't Change Bylaws for UAB

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25167509/sources-c-usa-wont-change-bylaws-to-keep-uab-without-football

[rrshock]

Looks like the mvc will probably have another member hopefully

[1972Shocker]

Looks like the mvc will probably have another member hopefully

I would not be at all surprised if UAB reinstates its football program and stays in C-USA.

[ShockdaWorld]

I would not be at all surprised if UAB reinstates its football program and stays in C-USA.

Probably depends if Nick Satan and his cronies will allow them to reinstate it.

[1972Shocker]

Probably depends if Nick Satan and his cronies will allow them to reinstate it.

Even if UAB reinstates football they may not be able to field a team next season. It may take then year to assemble a coaching staff and recruit enough bodies just to be able to put a team on the field and who knows how long until they are competitive.