Northeastern US College Funding

[danefan]

Maybe a better question is if Lacrosse (or other non revenue sports like rowing, golf, wrestling, or track and field) should be scholarship at all. The argument can be made for football, basketball, and perhaps baseball scholarships because a successful program can bring in more to the university than the expenditures, or at the very least do a lot for the visibility of the school to bring in potential new students. Apart from the big three sports (and perhaps volleyball and softball and softball for women's sports to help even out the expenses for Title IX reasons) does it make sense for universities to offer athletic scholarships?

I'm not saying that the teams shouldn't be fielded, but whats wrong with offering only academic (or academic related special skill related to the major, such as music performance) and need based aid to potential recruits for other sports?

I could be wrong, I know lacrosse is big at certain schools, but the NCAA doesn't seem to have attendance data on any of it, and though I'm aware Delaware fielded a lacrosse team, I don't personally know anyone who ever mentioned attending a game. Do hockey, lacrosse, track and field, etc, make economic sense for certain institutions? Is Johns Hopkins better off being able to offer a potential students a lacrosse scholarship if they couldn't offer that same student an academic scholarship?

Lacrosse is a terrible example. In many parts of the mid-Atlantic and Northeast, lacrosse out draws many football programs. And lacrosse is incredibly cheap in comparison to football. Only 13 or so scholarships per team. And, the average NCAA Lax championship game outdraws the FCS football championship by at least double in most years.

[Bogus Megapardus]

I used lacrosse as an example because requiring football at the Division I or II means all sports play there (unless you're Johns Hopkins). But just as an aside, in these parts lots of people go to lacrosse games. Hockey is another example. The lacrosse and hockey crowds tend to be younger and more enthusiastic than at many football games at old-school places where the aged alums in attendance can be a little sedate at times.

[aceinthehole]

What would happen if the state-run institutions went to Division II, like the are in Pennsylvania? Pennsylvania has 15 state-run Division II universities, many of which play some really good football with a solid fan base. I still never understood why everything in Louisiana (and Mississippi) has to be Division I.

Good point. Also, I think Mass. public colleges are all D-III.

In Connecticut, the 5 public universities offer athletics in all NCAA classifications:

Division I - UConn (Big East) and Central Conn. St. (NEC)
Division II - Southern Conn. St (NE-10)
Division III - Eastern Conn. St. (Little East) and Western Conn. St. (Little East)

* The federally-funded U.S. Coast Guard Academy in New London is D-III

[danefan]

In NY only the four University Centers are DI (Albany, Buffalo, Binghamton and Stony Brook).

The rest are DIII.

With that being said, NY pumps millions of dollars of taxpayer money into its private schools too so I guess Syracuse, Colgate, Wagner, St. Francis NY, Fordham, Columbia, and Cornell count as well.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Isn't C.W. Post in there too (PSAC, D-II)?

[superman7515]

I could be wrong, I know lacrosse is big at certain schools, but the NCAA doesn't seem to have attendance data on any of it, and though I'm aware Delaware fielded a lacrosse team, I don't personally know anyone who ever mentioned attending a game.

Be sure to come out when Johns Hopkins visits the Tub. There should be plenty of people there for the game.

[danefan]

Isn't C.W. Post in there too (PSAC, D-II)?

yes, but I was just listing the Private DI schools. You can add Marist, Iona, Siena, Manhattan (and the rest of the MAAC teams I'm missing) to that list above as well, but no football anymore except for Marist.

There are also about 100 private DIII schools in NY that I'm sure get some kind of taxpayer dollars.

[houtexan]

In NY only the four University Centers are DI (Albany, Buffalo, Binghamton and Stony Brook).

The rest are DIII.

With that being said, NY pumps millions of dollars of taxpayer money into its private schools too so I guess Syracuse, Colgate, Wagner, St. Francis NY, Fordham, Columbia, and Cornell count as well.
Nyack, Queens, Dominican, Concordia, etc. are all in New York and are all DII -- however, they do not compete in Football.

[MplsBison]

I'm pretty sure I want to know the logic behind this. The true student-athlete who wants to play lacrosse for UMass-Dartmouth or Salisbury State or the College of New Jersey can't choose to do so any longer, for example. They have to pay full tuition at an expensive private institution instead. Fascinating proposal.

False.

All it would mean is that they'd be playing at a DII school (where public schools belong) instead of DIII.

[MplsBison]

Lacrosse is a terrible example. In many parts of the mid-Atlantic and Northeast, lacrosse out draws many football programs. And lacrosse is incredibly cheap in comparison to football. Only 13 or so scholarships per team. And, the average NCAA Lax championship game outdraws the FCS football championship by at least double in most years.

Yeah but that's like the same thing as hockey: you've got the same group of ultra-die-hard fans going to every game. In other words, you take the number of unique individuals who attend lacrosse games over a season divided by the total population and you get a very miniscule number vs. broad-appeal sports like football and Men's bball.

That ties directly into TV ratings potential as well. In other words, if all your ultra-die-hards are at the game...who's at home watching on TV? You get the idea..

[MplsBison]

In NY only the four University Centers are DI (Albany, Buffalo, Binghamton and Stony Brook).

The rest are DIII.

With that being said, NY pumps millions of dollars of taxpayer money into its private schools too so I guess Syracuse, Colgate, Wagner, St. Francis NY, Fordham, Columbia, and Cornell count as well.

Other than those wierd "public" colleges at Cornell - you're saying that NY pumps state dollars into private schools? I don't think so.

[danefan]

Other than those wierd "public" colleges at Cornell - you're saying that NY pumps state dollars into private schools? I don't think so.

Willing to wager any $$ on that?

[Jackman]

Good point. Also, I think Mass. public colleges are all D-III.

UMass-Lowell is Division II, except in hockey where it's Division I. They don't play football. The rest of the Mass state universities are Division III except for UMass.


Maybe a better question is if Lacrosse (or other non revenue sports like rowing, golf, wrestling, or track and field) should be scholarship at all. The argument can be made for football, basketball, and perhaps baseball scholarships because a successful program can bring in more to the university than the expenditures, or at the very least do a lot for the visibility of the school to bring in potential new students. Apart from the big three sports (and perhaps volleyball and softball and softball for women's sports to help even out the expenses for Title IX reasons) does it make sense for universities to offer athletic scholarships?

I could be wrong, I know lacrosse is big at certain schools, but the NCAA doesn't seem to have attendance data on any of it, and though I'm aware Delaware fielded a lacrosse team, I don't personally know anyone who ever mentioned attending a game. Do hockey, lacrosse, track and field, etc, make economic sense for certain institutions?

At Delaware last year, Men's Lacrosse was the fourth highest attended sport, on both a per game and season total basis. Approximate attendance totals were:

124,000: Football
39,000: Women's Basketball
37,000: Men's Basketball
7,100: Men's Lacrosse
6,300: Women's Volleyball
5,600: Baseball
3000 to 2000: Field Hockey, Women's Lacrosse, Softball and Men's/Women's Soccer
0: Men's Golf, Men's/Women's Tennis, Men's/Women's Swimming, Men's/Women's Track, Men's/Women's Cross Country, Women's Rowing.

The 10 sports with no recorded attendance last season (or ever, AFAIK) account for a little over 15% of Delaware's total athletic budget expenditures. Football eats up almost a full third of Delaware's budget, but accounts for 54% of the total attendance of all sports combined. Even if the 10 zero-attendance sports sold tickets (people do watch these sports, they just don't bother counting them), the average number of home events for these sports is only 3.5 per season, so they have minimal revenue potential. If they were subjected to the same revenue analysis that our football programs are judged by, they would all be cut tomorrow.

Ice hockey, the biggest sport that Delaware does not offer, is successful at most institutions which have adopted it. At UMass for example it is the highest attended sport on a season total basis, while costing significantly less than football and men's basketball. It is UMass's leader in fans per dollar spent. At Delaware, the sport with the most fans per dollar spent is Women's Basketball.

Note that Division I members are required to sponsor a minimum of 14 different sports. Only 11 Delaware sports have any reported attendance at all.

I don't know what the above does to the argument you're trying to make, just thought I'd give you the lay of the land and let you go from there.

[BlueHenSinfonian]

UMass-Lowell is Division II, except in hockey where it's Division I. They don't play football. The rest of the Mass state universities are Division III except for UMass.



At Delaware last year, Men's Lacrosse was the fourth highest attended sport, on both a per game and season total basis. Approximate attendance totals were:

124,000: Football
39,000: Women's Basketball
37,000: Men's Basketball
7,100: Men's Lacrosse
6,300: Women's Volleyball
5,600: Baseball
3000 to 2000: Field Hockey, Women's Lacrosse, Softball and Men's/Women's Soccer
0: Men's Golf, Men's/Women's Tennis, Men's/Women's Swimming, Men's/Women's Track, Men's/Women's Cross Country, Women's Rowing.

The 10 sports with no recorded attendance last season (or ever, AFAIK) account for a little over 15% of Delaware's total athletic budget expenditures. Football eats up almost a full third of Delaware's budget, but accounts for 54% of the total attendance of all sports combined. Even if the 10 zero-attendance sports sold tickets (people do watch these sports, they just don't bother counting them), the average number of home events for these sports is only 3.5 per season, so they have minimal revenue potential. If they were subjected to the same revenue analysis that our football programs are judged by, they would all be cut tomorrow.

Ice hockey, the biggest sport that Delaware does not offer, is successful at most institutions which have adopted it. At UMass for example it is the highest attended sport on a season total basis, while costing significantly less than football and men's basketball. It is UMass's leader in fans per dollar spent. At Delaware, the sport with the most fans per dollar spent is Women's Basketball.

Note that Division I members are required to sponsor a minimum of 14 different sports. Only 11 Delaware sports have any reported attendance at all.

I don't know what the above does to the argument you're trying to make, just thought I'd give you the lay of the land and let you go from there.

Thanks for the info, where did you get it by the way? I keep searching for these things, as well as FCS football profitability statistics, but all I can find are Equity in Athletics stats for that, and those records aren't necessarily 100% accurate.

It's interesting that Women's B-ball is getting higher attendance than men's. It's been a few years since I've lived in Newark, but I know women's games used to be dead inside the Bob, and they would give tickets away at $1 a piece to groups. I would still wonder how profitable it is compared to some of the other sports, but it's good to see people are coming out to support the team.

Delaware does apparently offer hockey though, and is 2-0 so far this season, and playing WVU as we speak.

[NoCoDanny]

There is a conference out there called the Little East? That's awesome.

[superman7515]

It's interesting that Women's B-ball is getting higher attendance than men's. It's been a few years since I've lived in Newark, but I know women's games used to be dead inside the Bob, and they would give tickets away at $1 a piece to groups. I would still wonder how profitable it is compared to some of the other sports, but it's good to see people are coming out to support the team.

That was before the #1 ranked high school player in the nation left UConn and decided to play for Delaware. Now that Elena is playing for UD, the crowds are turning out. This could actually be a pretty good year for the team. Get a male athlete into UD basketball with these qualifications and men's basketball would jump up too:

McDonald's All-American Team 2008
USA Today National Player of the Year 2008
USA Today First Team All-America 2008
Naismith Prep Player of the Year 2008
Gatorade National Player of the Year 2008
EA SPORTS Player of the Year 2008
Third Team, All-America, Parade Magazine, 2007
Gatorade State Player of the Year, 2007
First-ever cover subject of GIRL magazine, 2007
Slam Magazine All-American First Team, 2006
Women's Basketball Magazine All-American First Team, 2006
Parade All American First Team, 2006
Sports Illustrated All-American Second Team, 2006
EA Sports All-American, 2006
USA Today All-American Third Team, 2006
Gatorade State Player of the Year, 2006
All-State First Team 2006
Scout/FCP SUPER SIX, 2005
Parade All-America Fourth Team, 2005
EA Sports All-America, 2005
Gatorade Delaware Player of the Year, 2005
DSBA Delaware Player of the Year, 2005
Street & Smith All-American Third Team, 2005
All-State First Team 2005
USA Today Freshman All-America, 2004
Nike All-America Camp, 2004
Honorable Mention, Street & Smith Preseason All-America, 2004
All-State First Team 2004

I've seen it written that the recruiting class that will be coming in next basketball season for the men's team is currently ranked #22 in the nation. If that's so, which is honestly beyond me unless we're heading for some serious NCAA sanctions, then in two or three years you should see the attendance coming up on the men's side.

[BlueHenSinfonian]

I'm aware of Elena, I'm just honestly (and pleasantly) surprised that having her around is making people care about women's b-ball. After the basketball program went CAA I liked watching the women's team more anyway, as they were actually competitive. Tina Martin has done great things for the program too, it just shows what you get when you hire a coach who knows what they are doing.

Back in the last couple America East years the men's team looked good, and I doubt it was only because of Ndongo Ndiaye, Madou Djouf, and Kestutis Marciulionus (although those guys were all awesome, and it was always fun to watch Ndiaye try to hug the refs after the called a foul on him), Brey knew how to coach the team, and they won, and I think his success at Notre Dame since leads credence to that. If they hadn't hired the succession of jokers they did for the Men's b-ball coaches they might be in a great position now too.

[NovaWildcat]

Does UD make money on Men's or Women's basketball?

[Dane96]

Willing to wager any $$ on that?

Mpls...talking out of his ***; what a shocker.

[aceinthehole]

There is a conference out there called the Little East? That's awesome.

http://www.littleeast.com/index.aspx

The "Little East" is a NCAA Division III conference. Its members are small, public colleges in New England:

Eastern Connecticut State
Keene State (NH)
Plymouth State (NH)
Rhode Island College
UMass Boston
UMass Dartmouth
Southern Maine
Western Connecticut State

Most Massachusetts public colleges are part of the D-III "Massachusetts State College Athletic Conference" (MASCAC):

Bridgewater State
Fitchburg State
Framingham State
Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts
Massachusetts Maritime Academy
Salem State
Westfield State
Worcester State

http://www.mascac.com/

[Bogus Megapardus]

Other than those wierd "public" colleges at Cornell - you're saying that NY pumps state dollars into private schools? I don't think so.

Do not private individuals donate to state universities? Of course they do. Should those donations be forbidden or restricted only to private institutions? Of course not. And state governments enter into public-private partnerships with private colleges as well. We're not a full-blown Marxist nation quite yet, I don't think.

Just yesterday, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell was at Lafayette announcing the next phase in a public-private initiative for a new multi-million dollar arts complex in downtown Easton, to be built and operated by the college. The federal government allots millions in grant money to private institutions every year. Look at the numbers for Penn and Harvard some time. Take a look at what Brown University does for local public education in Providence. State money goes there as well - with tremendous results. There are examples like this everywhere.

MplsBison - should the federal government restrict research grant money only to publicly chartered universities? Should taxpayer dollars - allocated to a downtown arts center, for example - be restricted only to state-run colleges? Would you prefer establishment of a public bureaucracy to run the local arts center rather than have it operated by a private college that already has world-renowned artists and designers in its midst?

[MplsBison]

Willing to wager any $$ on that?

Not unless you make the definitions a whole lot clearer. Obviously, there is something weird in the NY system that would possibly allow state dollars to go to private schools on a technicality.

But clearly the definition of a private school is no receiving public funding - so clearly you can't be correct in that sense. It's silly.

[MplsBison]

Do not private individuals donate to state universities? Of course they do. Should those donations be forbidden or restricted only to private institutions? Of course not. And state governments enter into public-private partnerships with private colleges as well. We're not a full-blown Marxist nation quite yet, I don't think.

Just yesterday, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell was at Lafayette announcing the next phase in a public-private initiative for a new multi-million dollar arts complex in downtown Easton, to be built and operated by the college. The federal government allots millions in grant money to private institutions every year. Look at the numbers for Penn and Harvard some time. Take a look at what Brown University does for local public education in Providence. State money goes there as well - with tremendous results. There are examples like this everywhere.

MplsBison - should the federal government restrict research grant money only to publicly chartered universities? Should taxpayer dollars - allocated to a downtown arts center, for example - be restricted only to state-run colleges? Would you prefer establishment of a public bureaucracy to run the local arts center rather than have it operated by a private college that already has world-renowned artists and designers in its midst?

Anything re: federal money is a red-herring -- I was very careful to highlight 'state' in my post. I don't care if federal grants go to private schools. They should.

And I also don't care if state money actually does go to private schools - in any form. That wasn't my point.


My point is actually pretty simple: the definition of a private school is that it does not receive state funding, like public schools do. So then obviously, the idea that private schools would be recieving public funding in that sense is silly.

Clearly, you're basis of counter-arguement is semantical or a technicality ... seemingly the lifeblood of 75% of "debates" on internet message boards.