Effects of University Athletics on the University: A Review and Extension of Empirical Assessment

Abstract

It is important for university decision makers to carefully scrutinize empirical data concerning the impacts of college athletics on the university as a whole in formulating strategies for athletic programs. This paper reviews and extends existing statistical work on the effects of college athletics using basic concepts from economics as guideposts. Current evidence indicates that success, and at times merely participation, in college athletics provides several benefits including direct financial gain and such indirect benefits as increased university exposure and, in turn, increased financial contributions and increased student applications and enrollment. Evidence concerning negative exposure from events such as NCAA sanctions is sparse but suggests opposite effects of smaller magnitude.

The impact of athletic performance on alumni giving: An analysis of microdata

“…Several studies examine time series of overall giving at an individual institution and how it varies with the success of major sports teams (Goff [2004], Grimes and Chressanthis [1994]). …”

The faculty Flutie factor: Does football performance affect a university's US News and World Report peer assessment score?

“…Books such as College Sports, Inc. (Sperber 1990) and Keeping Score (Sheehan, 1996) Much of this, however, may come from the publicly related cash flow which can often understate the contribution of the athletic department, by including tuition costs at the retail price, not the discounted price, and not including merchandise sales and licensing fees (Goff, 2000). Similarly, Litan, Orszag and Orszag (2003), in a study commission by the NCAA, find that high visibility programs are revenue neutral and thus pay for themselves.…”

“…Baade and Sundberg (1996) look at 167 college football teams from [1973][1974][1975][1976][1977][1978][1979][1980][1981][1982][1983][1984][1985][1986][1987][1988][1989][1990] and find that a bowl appearance results in a forty to fifty-four percent increase in alumni giving after a bowl appearance. Goff (2000) summarizes much of the literature on the subject, and…”

“…3 In addition, they find that the trend in football winning percentages for major athletic conference participants is associated with increases in the school's SAT scores. Goff (2000) shows that athletic success, and sometimes simply participation in college athletics, leads to increased university exposure and increased student applications and enrollment. Lovaglia and Lucas (2005) suggest that college students place more prestige on degrees received from public institutions with high-visibility athletic programs.…”

“…Research results on the effects of football performance are mixed, though most point to a benefit from success on the field either through a greater number of applications (Zimbalist, 1999;Murphy and Trandel, 1994;and Goff, 2000), higher SAT scores (McCormick and Tinsley, 1987) greater retention (Mixon andTreviño, 2005 andGoff, 2000), and greater rates and levels of donations (McCormick and Tinsley, 1990;Rhoads and Gerking, 2000;and Stinson and university characteristics; we find participants in the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) realize a higher peer score in the USNWR's annual guide than institutions that do not. Moreover, controlling for institutional heterogeneity, we discover that a one standard deviation increase in the votes received in the final Associated Press (AP) or USA Today Coaches' (Coaches) Poll, about 316 points and 282 points respectively, is associated with 0.009 unit increase in the peer assessment score.…”