RebKell's Junkie Boards

[pilight]

http://regressing.deadspin.com/how-title-ix-actually-makes-money-for-some-schools-1704245381

[Ex-Ref]

[beknighted]

It's a very interesting article.

The comments, unsurprisingly, demonstrate how little a lot of people understand economics - despite the very good explanation of opportunity cost - and how little they paid attention to what the article actually said.

[ClayK]

So I've coached many girls who've gone on to play sports at Division II or Division III schools, and they have chosen those schools just because of the opportunity to play there (in some cases, for a good team, in some cases not so good).

In all of these cases, the particular school benefited, but only if the school has unfilled admission goals. If the school is turning away full-pay students every year, then there is no marginal value in accepting athletes, even if they too pay the full tuition.

But at a school where full-pay students are turned away and athletes are given some kind of financial break (which happens even at Division III), then there is a direct cost.

In a large public school like UAB, it could be, though, that a partial scholarship to an out-of-state student would still net as much or more than if an in-state student paid full tuition, but in private schools, that would be highly unlikely.

Really, though, the argument in favor of colleges having sports teams is Darwinian: If it was not cost-effective and did not benefit the institution when all factors (marketing, alumni interest, donations, etc.) were taken into consideration, then colleges with sports would not compete as well in the marketplace and those without sports would thrive. Since that is not the case, then it seems pretty obvious (to me at least) that collegiate sports are an advantage to institutions, even at the D-III level.

_________________
Oṃ T�re Tutt�re Ture Sv�h�

[dtrain34]

Many a DIII is kept alive by recruitment of athletes -- Menlo College being one in your area, Clay.

The subject can be Googled -- lots of IIIs ADDING football to bring in male students, Adrian, I believe it was, pumping millions into adding facilities to bring in more athletes. Few D-Is have JV teams anymore, but DIIIs and some NAIAs have them in multiple sports in a somewhat cynical method of overrecruiting full-pay athletes without having to cut any.

[ClayK]

St. Mary's College in Moraga used to have football, but as the school got healthier (more applications), it dropped the sport.

If you're turning away paying customers, you don't need to add sports. You most likely need to keep what you have, but if your campus isn't full, then I think the logic in that article applies.

_________________
Oṃ T�re Tutt�re Ture Sv�h�

[dtrain34]

Another factor in the Gaels dropping football, which was a great picturesque event to attend on their grass-and-tree-lined field, was the NCAA ending the practice of Division Is playing down to II (where the Gaels wanted to be and had been) or III and requiring them to at least play 1-AA (FCS nowadays).

That put the Gallopers, who I recall were granting 30 or so scholarships, up against Big Sky competition, where the top schools were giving the NCAA max of 65 or so. They were going to be constant losers in that scenario and, as you mention, would gain none of the enrollment upgrade if they sucked it up and went with 35 more scholarships, eliminating the fair number of full-pay walk-ons they must have been suiting up.