02-04-2013, 02:54 PM
Delta Cost Project recently released a study on the impact of athletic spending on college costs. DCP is doing a number of studies related to drivers of higher education cost at public unviersities. (Not all of their research focuses on athletics.)
Some interesting observations:
1. MAC Institutions report spending an average of $13,069 per year/per FTE student vs. $52,537 per year/per athlete. Spending ratio of 4 to 1 in favor of student athletes.
2. Other conferences, particularly BSC, spend far more on student athletes than the MAC; some up to a 9 to 1 ratio. Our problem is in the subsidies from MAC institutions. BCS conferences generate enough revenue to require less in institutional subsidies. Even though few BCS institutions can cover all costs through generated revenue, most do better with carrying their own weight. MAC institutions subsidize athletics in roughly the 70 - 80% range.
3. Athletic Department spending at DI institutions are rising at 2X the cost of academic spending.
4. The increased athletic spending is not reflected on increased spending per athlete. The biggest drivers are coaches' salaries (averaging one third of a D1 athletic budget) and facilities.
So, put this together. Joe Schmo faces another 5% tuition increase, but doesn't get more, because that money goes to athletics. But the athletes don't get more, because the subsidized money goes to the new head coach. Kind of a hard sell with the increasing pressure to reduce student cost for a higher education.
The report is here.
Atheltic Vs. Academic Spending: Who Wins?
These threads often degenerate into who likes/ hates sports. That's too bad because this is a very sticky problem every sports loving AD in the MAC deals with.
Maybe we should appreciate the MAC ADs who get the most while spending the least instead of the least while spending the most.
Some interesting observations:
1. MAC Institutions report spending an average of $13,069 per year/per FTE student vs. $52,537 per year/per athlete. Spending ratio of 4 to 1 in favor of student athletes.
2. Other conferences, particularly BSC, spend far more on student athletes than the MAC; some up to a 9 to 1 ratio. Our problem is in the subsidies from MAC institutions. BCS conferences generate enough revenue to require less in institutional subsidies. Even though few BCS institutions can cover all costs through generated revenue, most do better with carrying their own weight. MAC institutions subsidize athletics in roughly the 70 - 80% range.
3. Athletic Department spending at DI institutions are rising at 2X the cost of academic spending.
4. The increased athletic spending is not reflected on increased spending per athlete. The biggest drivers are coaches' salaries (averaging one third of a D1 athletic budget) and facilities.
So, put this together. Joe Schmo faces another 5% tuition increase, but doesn't get more, because that money goes to athletics. But the athletes don't get more, because the subsidized money goes to the new head coach. Kind of a hard sell with the increasing pressure to reduce student cost for a higher education.
The report is here.
Atheltic Vs. Academic Spending: Who Wins?
These threads often degenerate into who likes/ hates sports. That's too bad because this is a very sticky problem every sports loving AD in the MAC deals with.
Maybe we should appreciate the MAC ADs who get the most while spending the least instead of the least while spending the most.