D1 is pulling through (it seems)

I saw this. But also I think more then fifty percent of conferences could cancel. Even now we are operating at 25 percent cancelled, but only 2 of the top 30 teams.

Volleyball and XC could flirt with the 50% because they are universally sponsored (nearly) and enough small conferences could cancel to reach that proportion.

FBS football has 10 conferences, none of which have moved to cancel, but I think the total of DI conferences that have moved to cancel is 10 (mostly non football DIs, bt some FBS). That is about 1/3 of the conferences but as someone said probably just over 1/4 of the schools since the smaller conferences tend to be 8 to 12 schools vs the 12 to 16 teams in the G5 and P5.

I am hoping things get off. Nothing has compelled DI to cancel yet, so it is hard to imagine that anything could at this point.

When infections rise in October, the landscape will look very different. Things will cancel themselves..........

Even if the season starts, it is inevitable that dozens of teams will have coronavirus outbreaks. Then the NCAA is going to be forced to cancel the season.

Follow the money.

D1 (FBS specifically) relies heavily on the football budget to float the athletic department. They can't cancel everyone but football so as of right now, as long as football gets the green light, they all get the green light.

Outside of P5 schools, football is the biggest hole in the budget. P5 schools are the only ones that would benefit from playing in the Fall.

Bleh wrote:

Outside of P5 schools, football is the biggest hole in the budget. P5 schools are the only ones that would benefit from playing in the Fall.

Here are line-item budgets, you can see footballs expenses. Yes it's a big expense but even for G5 conferences, they rely on football to write against other sports. Heck, even programs that usually take a loss rely on playing a P5 game for a check (think App state vs. Michigan) or other directional school vs P5 school

Looked at the data at a couple different places I've worked. I'm doubtful the data is reliable given some basic factual information wasn't even close (e.g. student enrollment was listed at nearly 10,000 students LESS than what actually attend).

Perhaps it was a typo, but given my familiarity with budgets, what I saw was different than what I experienced.

There is likely little chance U.S. Department of Education verifies the information submitted by institutions. As such, it could be somewhat easy to massage the #s the way the institution wants to have them presented.

I agree with Bleh - based on my experience at both P5 and G5 schools - a super majority of FB programs cost MORE than what they bring in. Part of that is on admin. When they permit the FB program to rent hotel rooms for the team the night before a game - costing over 10K for the special meal and housing - when they could have stayed in their typical homes, THAT is a waste of money.

And for D2, D3 and NAIA programs - there is absolutely NO WAY FB revenue is paying for the other sports. Heck, some smaller schools don't even charge admission to the FB games.

Correction - When they permit the FB program to rent hotel rooms for the team the night before a HOME game.

FWIW, I played at a P5 school. We stayed in a hotel before all games as at some point in the 90s, a visiting teams fan did a drive-by on some players houses.

Swim Bike Run wrote:

FWIW, I played at a P5 school. We stayed in a hotel before all games as at some point in the 90s, a visiting teams fan did a drive-by on some players houses.

Understood. FWIW Road teams, in College and the Pros, have long experienced night time intrusions when staying at a hotel.

Certainly there is some merit to staying in a hotel as a team for a home contest, but I believe the big picture cons far outweigh the pros.

But, I'm no AD so my opinion really doesn't matter. Just stating I disagree with the practice. Eliminating it is PART of a solution to get spending in college athletics a bit more under control.

and yes, non profits and athletic departments try and hide all income or to make balances look like zeros. I guess we just have different experiences as most budgets I have seen show football being the lone profit item.

What about a D1 school trying to run XC that won’t have football this fall? Like an FCS school. Will that help or hurt chances for xc?

Hard to tell. Good news is XC is one of the least expensive sports to run. Coaches often double up as T&F. Usually the XC budget is rolled in with the T&F budget. Will be up to the conferences. I would not be surprised to see a modified format like 4 people per team and time trial style instead of mass start racing.

Bigger problem is it's hard to justify canceling other sports and keeping football or vice versa. If you keep football only "they're only doing it for the money." If you cut football, athletic departments could run into cash flow issues. Even if it is a loss, it produces cashflow.

Imagine going to college TO GO TO COLLEGE.

Imagine running/playing in some other paradigm that is NOT COLLEGE.

That world would be a much better place.

Swim Bike Run wrote:

I guess we just have different experiences as most budgets I have seen show football being the lone profit item.

I certainly don't have a lot of experience viewing athletic budgets - but at one of my previous stops there was a professor who did a study examining the actual costs of college athletics and particularly which programs actually made a profit through football. I believe it was a longitudinal study, but I can't recall for how many years data were analyzed.

One primary finding was that only about one dozen P5 football programs actually MAKE money for their respective athletic programs; all others lost money. These findings were reported to the school's faculty leaders and was addressed by our AD at that time.

One justification the AD used (we were a school losing money sponsoring football) was that the professor's study couldn't account for - in terms of dollars - the value of publicity brought to the institution via the FB program. He argued that the prestige and prominence of the FB team attracted donor money and students the couldn't be calculated.

I can see that line of thinking to a degree, but at the end of the day, institutions have to account for dollars spent and dollars obtained regardless of conjecture of whether or not more or less was spent or obtained based on the prestige of a particular program.

Not the MAC.

RIP MAC. Not looking good at all

i agree. its over. so unnecessary. we should have sports. cant shutdown forever.