gs11rmb
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 12:43:39 GMT -5
Posts: 3,303
|
Post by gs11rmb on Aug 12, 2019 13:47:16 GMT -5
I guess that's the part that confuses me. If, for argument's sake, only football and basketball make money for a school then why wouldn't they just offer those two programs and then provide the same number of scholarships for women?
Football = 100 athletes Basketball = 50 athletes
Women's sports = 150 athletes
Why have multiple sports for both genders that don't make money?
To be clear, I am not anti-college sports, I just don't understand the logic.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,309
Member is Online
|
Post by swamp on Aug 12, 2019 13:56:57 GMT -5
why does a college have a marching band, or offer plays, or student radio, or any other program? None of them make money for the school.
It's all part of the "college experience" and assists in recruiting students and making them part of the college so they donate as alums.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 12, 2019 14:19:11 GMT -5
I guess that's the part that confuses me. If, for argument's sake, only football and basketball make money for a school then why wouldn't they just offer those two programs and then provide the same number of scholarships for women? Football = 100 athletes Basketball = 50 athletes Women's sports = 150 athletes Why have multiple sports for both genders that don't make money? To be clear, I am not anti-college sports, I just don't understand the logic. Several reasons, some swamp already pointed out, so I won't go into those. Other reasons: -Athletics programs help get athletic facilities built that other students have access to, increasing the student experience (either directly through capital projects funded by the athletic department, or indirectly through donations to the athletic program...at the school I went to, they built a rather large rec center largely through donations that would house indoor track and some other events, but 99% of the year it was used by non-athlete students), pretty much all of the lower level athletic programs like soccer at my alma mater ended up with fields put to use by intramurals...the hockey team helped get the ice arena built used by both the school and community for activities, etc. Even if they don't pay for it all, they help pay for it, which otherwise would simply be an expense of the general population. -Athletic programs generate interest for alums and boosters -Athletic programs offer opportunities for academic participation (i.e. physical trainers, turfgrass maintenance, etc...and to swamp's point, musicians, broadcasting, acting all benefit from having those other programs which don't make money but which drive students in that major for admissions) -It drives admissions. Many students want to go to schools that have fun stuff to do. Attending athletic events is fun (ditto for plays, student radio, etc). It's a way to either differentiate yourselves from a similar school or more likely to keep up with the Joneses. -And finally, just because an individual sport doesn't make money, it doesn't mean the athletic department overall isn't either making money, or getting something significant out of it. For example, if I donate $100 million to the football program, but I specify that I want it used for a practice facility. You haven't made any money off of that...I gave you $100 million and you spent $100 million...but you've now got a big juicy asset you didn't have before. Same goes for the idea that in order to get particular season tickets to the football program I have to be a "Platinum Booster Member" which requires a $50,000 donation to the athletic program. It entitles me to more than just football seats, so it's not directly going to the football program. I have to donate $50,000 to the general athletic department in order to give the football program $5,000 for seats...when in reality I may only ever do that SPECIFICALLY to get the football seats and would have been happy to hand over $55,000 directly to the football program.
|
|
TheOtherMe
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 14:40:52 GMT -5
Posts: 27,157
Mini-Profile Name Color: e619e6
|
Post by TheOtherMe on Aug 12, 2019 14:58:38 GMT -5
Those required donations for access to season tickets make millions for the colleges and universities. Those are no longer tax deductible either.
Colorado has required any one purchasing a ticket to the Nebraska game this year to make a donation to CU. Smart marketing making the Huskers make donations to CU.
Before Title IX, women had few opportunities in sports. What they did have were run on budgets with pretty much nothing in them for money.
They washed their own uniforms, bought their own shoes, etc. The women's coaches were poorly paid. They traveled by van while the football team and men's basketball flew to away games.
I've heard many stories from CU women's basketball players about those van trips across the Midwest to play Iowa State, Nebraska, Kansas, etc. while the men flew to the games.
The donations have brought about beautiful athletic and training facilities.
|
|
spartan7886
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 7, 2011 14:04:22 GMT -5
Posts: 788
|
Post by spartan7886 on Aug 13, 2019 8:11:39 GMT -5
I guess that's the part that confuses me. If, for argument's sake, only football and basketball make money for a school then why wouldn't they just offer those two programs and then provide the same number of scholarships for women? Football = 100 athletes Basketball = 50 athletes Women's sports = 150 athletes Why have multiple sports for both genders that don't make money? To be clear, I am not anti-college sports, I just don't understand the logic. One other thing I haven't seen mentioned yet - if you want to offer Div 1 football, the NCAA requires you to compete in at least 14 sports with minimum numbers of men vs women sports, team vs individual, and fall vs spring.
|
|
TheOtherMe
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 14:40:52 GMT -5
Posts: 27,157
Mini-Profile Name Color: e619e6
|
Post by TheOtherMe on Aug 13, 2019 12:18:54 GMT -5
I know there are fans in Colorado who want men's lacrosse and men's tennis added but it isn't happening because they would have to add women's sports. CU already has women's lacrosse and women's tennis.
The last sport they dropped was men's tennis. That put them at the minimum number of sports required to stay in DI.
|
|
HoneyBBQ
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 10:36:09 GMT -5
Posts: 5,395
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"3b444e"}
|
Post by HoneyBBQ on Aug 14, 2019 10:24:08 GMT -5
I played D1 soccer (20 years ago).
It's a big commitment. In time, energy, focus. I see no reason why people can't do academia and athletics at the same time IF they are very organized, and get their work done on time. There's less time for partying, drinking, hanging out, smoking dope, finding yourself, playing chess, sex with randoms, reading poetry, and all other things that young adults do at college.
If she loves it and wants to do it I'd support her 100% with the idea that she can always quit (at the end of the season).
The workout schedule is pretty rough- 5x a week of soccer, plus 2-3 weight sessions and 2-3 endurance/running sessions, not even counting travel. It's a lot. But it's manageable.
|
|