- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Anyone following the number of colleges that are shutting down athletic programs?
Posted on 4/3/25 at 8:38 am to MrLSU
Posted on 4/3/25 at 8:38 am to MrLSU
quote:
The House v. NCAA settlement is starting to really impact college athletics
quote:
On May 23, 2024, the National Collegiate Athletic Association voted to settle the lawsuit for US$2.75 billion, agreeing to a revenue-sharing model allowing member institutions to distribute funds up to US$20 million to Division I athletes who have played since 2016.
Doesn’t look like you listed Division I programs. You listed several DII and NAIA schools.
I assume declining enrollments are the cause. Will get worst. Schools are facing a “enrollment cliff”
This post was edited on 4/3/25 at 10:11 am
0
Posted on 4/3/25 at 8:54 am to MrLSU
it's not really amateur sports anymore, it's semi-pro. It's not really a "school activity" anymore because the athletes are free agents every year.
it's nothing like it was intended to be. It is completely different now.
it's nothing like it was intended to be. It is completely different now.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 9:03 am to MrLSU
Not every college needs a robust athletic program. I think it is more appropriate for a lot of them to just have club teams, etc. I see no problem with this. Somewhere along the line, every university decided they needed a resource heavy athletic department and they just don't. They are drains in most cases.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 9:20 am to chalmetteowl
quote:
Dont they have minimum numbers of programs that they must have?
NCAA requires 16 programs to participate in FBS football, 14 programs if going the FCS route. Many have speculated that the NCAA will lower those requirements.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 9:23 am to TigerintheNO
Everyone that is just turning their nose at all these programs shutting down or downsizing, it’s not about the NIL that sucks. The 1% athlete is still gonna get his. But there are thousands and thousands of kids every year that get scholarships to play sports at smaller schools that helps them get a free or reduced education. Those are the opportunities going away that will suck IMO.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 10:07 am to ChestRockwell
quote:
What about LSU-Eunice and Shreveport?
LSU-S Baseball is like 41-0
Posted on 4/3/25 at 12:39 pm to MrLSU
The College Athletics craze over the last 50 years after Title IV needs some desperate pruning....maybe the haves and NIL will demolish general funded sports to Intramurals for the have nots.
Everybody had to offer everything and then the craze to jump up to Division 1 status....everyone saw pots of gold in the 90s only to be handed pyrite.
The era of sports factories instead of Universities might be waning for those outside the 1-2 %ers....just like hosting the Olympics isn't worth it, supporting the albatross that became College Athletics and its gluttony was always a struggle and not worth it for most.
When you have to constantly gladhand alums and boosters to foot the bill for your sports programs, this unsustainable model built around Title IX and that house of cards was inevitably going to bubble over and then burst.
Everybody had to offer everything and then the craze to jump up to Division 1 status....everyone saw pots of gold in the 90s only to be handed pyrite.
The era of sports factories instead of Universities might be waning for those outside the 1-2 %ers....just like hosting the Olympics isn't worth it, supporting the albatross that became College Athletics and its gluttony was always a struggle and not worth it for most.
When you have to constantly gladhand alums and boosters to foot the bill for your sports programs, this unsustainable model built around Title IX and that house of cards was inevitably going to bubble over and then burst.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:46 pm to Tigerpride18
quote:don't be an arse. this affects a lot of people.
will college sports survive without those bluebloods
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:49 pm to MrLSU
in retrospect there are more community colleges who are adding athletic programs. My son is going to one who just added baseball about 5 years ago. Juco is where most will go to get noticed by D1s and D2s moving forward.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:53 pm to Alt26
quote:
College sports, specifically football and men's basketball (at the D-1) level have multi-million dollar BUSINESSES for decades. The players now getting to share in that revenue is just a logical part of the business.
People say this stuff as if these are investor-owned. Not-for-profits exist to serve a mission. Any not-for-profit is effectively taxpayer funded, not in the form cash payments from the government, but in the form of tax benefits.
I fail to see what mission-based value these programs provide at this point.
Can you imagine St. Jude’s saying we’ve got to cut the number of patients we are seeing because our income statement will look better if we only serve the wealthiest patients? That’s effectively how college programs act today.
College athletics and the university system as a whole have completely lost sight of its mission, and there should be serious consideration whether or not any of these programs, even the profitable ones, create value for society now.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:55 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
there should be serious consideration whether or not any of these programs, even the profitable ones, create value for society now.
If they did way back when why wouldnt they now?
Posted on 4/3/25 at 1:59 pm to TomRollTideRitter
I made this point in the Deion thread but it applies generally...with government funding becoming more uncertain it's a fight among schools for lucrative out of state students and bigtime sports programs are essentially marketing programs aimed at those higher paying students.
When it works well, it works really well as Bama found out under Saban bringing in record numbers of nonresident tuition payers but I'm sure the cost/benefit will be called into question at some schools as more money is needed for players.
When it works well, it works really well as Bama found out under Saban bringing in record numbers of nonresident tuition payers but I'm sure the cost/benefit will be called into question at some schools as more money is needed for players.
This post was edited on 4/3/25 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:17 pm to chalmetteowl
quote:
If they did way back when why wouldnt they now?
College athletics are a social enterprise where the revenues created from it are meant to fund the college educations of the participants. I’d argue until the 2010s, maybe earlier, college athletics departments were growing in numbers and sports sponsored meaning they were fulfilling their purpose by providing more educational opportunities. That’s not to say they had no issues during that period, but I think they still created societal value.
Now, the schools are putting more fees on students and donors to pay for athletic departments items that in no way advance that mission - lavish facilities, travel for the nonsensical conferences, ballooning administrator and coaching salaries, and now player salaries whether through “NIL” or profit sharing.
I don’t hear any major programs discussing adding sports at this time. Cutting a sport and its associated scholarships to afford to pay to compete in a more profitable sport is antithetical to the mission of a university.
The educational experience is now a complete farce as well do to the travel required by modern conferences and the constant movement of players. Universities, even Stanford, have also laxed admissions to accommodate the transfer portal.
The university’s mission and the athletic department’s goals are in far more conflict today than in the past.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:26 pm to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
with government funding becoming more uncertain it's a fight among schools for lucrative out of state students and bigtime sports programs are essentially marketing programs aimed at those higher paying students.
This is true, but it gets to an underlying problem with the university system which is the people running it are only incentivized to look at 1/2 half of the P&L. An administrator is an expense, so they really have no incentive to curtail expenses. They only focus on growing revenue.
quote:
When it works well, it works really well as Bama found out under Saban bringing in record numbers of nonresident tuition payers but I'm sure the cost/benefit will be called into question at some schools as more money is needed for players.
This is a half truth. The university shelled out a ton on scholarships and facilities to make that happen. It also just coincided with a general flight to the south. For every California kid with wealthy parents that paid to go to Bama, there was a Chicago kid with a 34 ACT getting to go to Bama for free.
The growth of the university has continued despite the decline of the football program this decade. That may change though if the football goes completely down the tube.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:30 pm to TomRollTideRitter
Buddy the entire university experience has become a commercial enterprise. Have you been on a campus recently? Tried to park or buy some of the food? The entire experience has become about generating money. Not just the athletic departments.
Posted on 4/3/25 at 2:58 pm to TomRollTideRitter
At some point, every organization forgets the original mission, and pivots to the new mission, which is raising money.
Posted on 4/4/25 at 5:13 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
The educational experience is now a complete farce as well do to the travel required by modern conferences and the constant movement of players. Universities, even Stanford, have also laxed admissions to accommodate the transfer portal.
Getting “transfer” credits was a tortuous process back in the day. If I had transferred every year, I think it would have taken at least 5 and maybe 6 years to graduate.
The schools must be approving course work for the players who are transferring in.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News