New tier of Division 1 for NIL

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

This is not MU, but track and field operates at a massive loss around the country: https://www.thesportsexaminer.com/lane-one-study-shows-u-s-colleges-spent-almost-1-billion-on-track-with-more-than-25000-athletes-on-scholarship/

From the article: "In NCAA Division I – all sections combined – the schools collected $443.78 in revenue and lost a collective $164.10 million. Almost all of that was with the big schools in the Football Bowl Subdivision, which had a combined loss of $165.16 million. Ouch!"


Again, I don't think Marquette is spending $2 million on its CCTF programs.

[lawdog77]

OK...I will lose that bet. Thanks for the information, although I am skeptical that Marquette is spending close to that amount.

But now let's do track and field.  There are 86 athletes on the men's and women's roster.  86 x $35,000 = $3,010,000.  30.6 scholarships x $35,000 = $1,071,000.  That's a different of nearly $2 million.  And even though that's a three season sport if you include cross country, there is no way that the costs exceed $2 million.

You are assuming those 50 non schol athletes are at MU solely based on their ability to walk on to the T&F team. that is not the case.

[Boozemon Barro]

You're rolling your eyes at me? Your argument is financially illiterate.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

You are assuming those 50 non schol athletes are at MU solely based on their ability to walk on to the T&F team. that is not the case.

You are correct that I am making that assumption.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

You're rolling your eyes at me? Your argument is financially illiterate.

Not when you are looking at the marginal cost of adding students.  The overhead is there regardless.

[lawdog77]

You are correct that I am making that assumption.

You would be wrong. Just because MU allows a 3rd string pole vaulter to be allowed on the roster does not mean the Athletic Department gets to add their tuition room and board costs to the Athletic Department's bottom line.

Many Marquette students pick MU for the academics, then decide to try out for track and field.

[Boozemon Barro]

Not when you are looking at the marginal cost of adding students.  The overhead is there regardless.

Then why are you leaving the overhead out of your calculation? You can't include the full tuition as revenue and leave out the per student overhead costs of the university if you're trying to determine profitability. It's not like without track and field the university wouldn't be able to replace those 84 spots with non-athletes.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Then why are you leaving the overhead out of your calculation? You can't include the full tuition as revenue and leave out the per student overhead costs of the university if you're trying to determine profitability. It's not like without track and field the university wouldn't be able to replace those 84 spots with non-athletes.

The assumption in your last sentence is where you are wrong. Oftentimes athletes are only going to choose a place based on if they have athletic opportunities. They aren't taking a "spot" that the University would otherwise give to someone else.

You would be wrong. Just because MU allows a 3rd string pole vaulter to be allowed on the roster does not mean the Athletic Department gets to add their tuition room and board costs to the Athletic Department's bottom line.

Many Marquette students pick MU for the academics, then decide to try out for track and field.

That doesn't mirror my experience at all.

[Boozemon Barro]

The assumption in your last sentence is where you are wrong. Oftentimes athletes are only going to choose a place based on if they have athletic opportunities. They aren't taking a "spot" that the University would otherwise give to someone else.

That makes zero sense. If the university has capacity to house and educate the athletes, they would have the capacity to house and educate non-athletes in their place should the program be shut down. Why wouldn't they? Do buildings and professors just manifest out of thin air if a track and field program exists? Would they
then disappear into the ether if the track and field program goes away?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

That makes zero sense. If the university has capacity to house and educate the athletes, they would have the capacity to house and educate non-athletes in their place should the program be shut down. Why wouldn't they? Do buildings and professors just manifest out of thin air if a track and field program exists? Would they
then disappear into the ether if the track and field program goes away?

I would guess that if Marquette dropped its CCTF program, it would cause an decrease in enrollment similar to the roster size of the CCTF program if everything else could be normalized.

You don't seem to understand that in today's operating environment, hardly any but the elite universities are anywhere near full capacity. Marquette certainly isn't.  The abillity to continue competing in a sport, AND getting a Marquette education, is why the majority of these students are choosing to come here.

Would SOME choose to come to MU anyway? Sure. But if a similar school offered them a spot on their athletic team and Marquette didn't, they would likely choose to attend the other school.

[lawdog77]

That doesn't mirror my experience at all.

D-1 schools handle this differently than D2, d3 etc. D1 schools do not count walkon tuition as revenue to the athletics programs.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

D-1 schools handle this differently than D2, d3 etc. D1 schools do not count walkon tuition as revenue to the athletics programs.

I've worked at D1 schools. I'm not talking about my D3 experiences.

[lawdog77]

I've worked at D1 schools. I'm not talking about my D3 experiences.

I know University of Oregon for one does not. Their 2022 records show revenue for track and field of 295K with expenses of 2.1M. For 2022 LSU shows revenue for track and field of 37K with expenditures of 5M.

You are honestly the first person I have heard state that non revenue sports for D1 are moneymakers to the university.

[StillAWarrior]

I know University of Oregon for one does not. Their 2022 records show revenue for track and field of 295K with expenses of 2.1M. For 2022 LSU shows revenue for track and field of 37K with expenditures of 5M.

You are honestly the first person I have heard state that non revenue sports for D1 are moneymakers to the university.

I'm not picking a side here, but when they show "revenue for track and field" are they talking about the tuition and fees paid to the university by the athletes? Or are they just talking about gate receipts, media rights, etc.?

[Galway Eagle]

I know University of Oregon for one does not. Their 2022 records show revenue for track and field of 295K with expenses of 2.1M. For 2022 LSU shows revenue for track and field of 37K with expenditures of 5M.

You are honestly the first person I have heard state that non revenue sports for D1 are moneymakers to the university.

Years ago cracked sidewalks posted the revenue numbers and found we actually made a slight amount of money on women's basketball. If we're making money with those crowds I'd imagine places like Wisconsin or Nebraska make money on Volleyball and that Minnesota or North Dakota probably make money on Hockey.

[lawdog77]

I'm not picking a side here, but when they show "revenue for track and field" are they talking about the tuition and fees paid to the university by the athletes? Or are they just talking about gate receipts, media rights, etc.?

From my experience D1 schools dont count it as revenue, as these are gen pop students.

[lawdog77]

Years ago cracked sidewalks posted the revenue numbers and found we actually made a slight amount of money on women's basketball. If we're making money with those crowds I'd imagine places like Wisconsin or Nebraska make money on Volleyball and that Minnesota or North Dakota probably make money on Hockey.

From google:
The women's volleyball program at UW - Madison made $2,042,717 in revenue and spent $6,269,641 in expenses.

[Galway Eagle]

From google:
The women's volleyball program at UW - Madison made $2,042,717 in revenue and spent $6,269,641 in expenses.

I suppose I to could have googled this before guessing based on big crowds.

[lawdog77]

I suppose I to could have googled this before guessing based on big crowds.

Hinestly, a lot of it is creative accounting.

[Galway Eagle]

Hinestly, a lot of it is creative accounting.

Nebraska turns a profit in volleyball

https://omaha.com/sports/huskers/volleyball/how-much-money-did-nebraska-make-off-the-memorial-stadium-volleyball-match/article_5284b43f-92b5-52ee-b819-614da8aeada2.html#:~:text=Based%20on%20data%20from%20Fiscal,conferences%20to%20turn%20a%20profit.

[lawdog77]

Nebraska turns a profit in volleyball

https://omaha.com/sports/huskers/volleyball/how-much-money-did-nebraska-make-off-the-memorial-stadium-volleyball-match/article_5284b43f-92b5-52ee-b819-614da8aeada2.html#:~:text=Based%20on%20data%20from%20Fiscal,conferences%20to%20turn%20a%20profit.

This line stood out:
Based on data from Fiscal Year 2022, Nebraska volleyball was the lone women's program at a public institution in the Power 6 conferences to turn a profit.

[lawdog77]

A few more "details" about the NCAA plan

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/39056505/ncaa-rule-changes-nil-paying-athletes-title-ix-charlie-baker-faq

[MU82]

Caitlin Clark gets an estimated $1M for NIL.

She could return to Iowa for a fifth season ... and unless she's really tired of playing college ball, why wouldn't she?

For a top men's player, leaving is a no-brainer. Lottery picks make more than they can get in NIL, plus they get the clock ticking on the really big dough that'll come with their second contract.

For a top women's player with a big NIL deal, she can't make anywhere near that in the WNBA. Maybe if she also plays overseas she can, but it's got to be appealing to stay in school, get a paid-for degree (or two or three) and make big NIL bucks.

[Herman Cain]

The assumption in your last sentence is where you are wrong. Oftentimes athletes are only going to choose a place based on if they have athletic opportunities. They aren't taking a "spot" that the University would otherwise give to someone else.

The ability to play on a D1 Athletics is a huge draw for students at school like MU.  Great way to recruit tuition paying families. Also over the years , many of the students end up as large alumni donors. At the large state schools Athletics draws non resident paying students in large numbers.

Going down to the D2 and D3 levels Athletics is an even bigger inducement. That is why those schools are constantly adding programs . All the University Presidents I know view Athletics as on one of their centerpieces of student recruitment .

[rocket surgeon]

From google:
The women's volleyball program at UW - Madison made $2,042,717 in revenue and spent $6,269,641 in expenses.

  tough way to run a biness. you can only write off these losses for a few years before you need to show some positive revenue, eyn'a?