Non Revenue Generating Sports

Joined
Dec 27, 2023
Messages
546
Reaction score
304
Points
63
With the rising costs, expenses of sport programs, travel, athletes & facilities. When will colleges start eliminating the negative revenue programs? Taking from the financial successful to the financial failures can last so long. Title IX is changing.
 

Football, Men’s/Womens Basketball/Hockey, Softball and Volleyball are really the only sports the U should have. Don’t think Baseball is even getting it done anymore. Don’t know enough about Track and Field.
 

They already are? We eliminated Men's Gymnastics and Men's Tennis after the 2020-21 seasons. We were going to eliminate Men's track and field (indoor and outdoor) too until the UMN Regents voted to save it.
 

As long as football and its 85 scholarships remain linked to the school (in this day and age who knows what the future holds for CFB) no women’s sport is going anywhere, for Title IX reasons.
 

They already are? We eliminated Men's Gymnastics and Men's Tennis after the 2020-21 seasons. We were going to eliminate Men's track and field (indoor and outdoor) too until the UMN Regents voted to save it.
and mens golf until Lehman saved it
 


With the rising costs, expenses of sport programs, travel, athletes & facilities. When will colleges start eliminating the negative revenue programs? Taking from the financial successful to the financial failures can last so long. Title IX is changing.

For most schools that would mean eliminating Men's Hockey too.
 

St. Cloud dropped football for hockey. North Dakota dropped baseball & Women's hockey just to name a few. Any others?
 

St. Cloud dropped football for hockey. North Dakota dropped baseball & Women's hockey just to name a few. Any others?

Hmm? New question huh?

Now tell us how many College Hockey programs, Men's or Women's are profitable.

"Taking from the financial successful to the financial failures can last so long."
 

terence Football, Men’s/Womens Basketball/Hockey, Softball and Volleyball are really the only sports the U should have. Don’t think Baseball is even getting it done anymore. Don’t know enough about Track and Field.
Not how it works. B1g network televised LOTS of men’s and women’s games. They NEED the content provided by non-revenue so they can make enough PROFIT to shell out all those millions to each conference member school.

Title IX is here to stay. Thankfully, Title Ix and non-revenue generally are fairly cheap off-setters that help sports like football stay around.
How much does wrestling cost to run and how much does it bring in?

There is more to B1G sports than just football and basketball sports fans!

:0)
 
Last edited:



Only football and mens basketball are profitable. Others mght be close. Football is the problem. Money maker but 85 scholarships.


Better to establish a set of required sports for each conference and a set of optional sports Based on all sports but football. To meet titleIX the equivalence in net money is given to cover womens sports. No sense forcing ice hockey where it is not wanted. Perhaps say that each major conference must have 10 mens and 10 womens sports. No major status if less. If a team offers less than minimum they get no TV money.Given the large TV money availlible should be workable. Number of sports up to discussion.

Required sports

Men Required: Football, Basketball, Track and Field ,golf Preferred options: Hockey, baseball, soccer, tennis, volleyball, gymnastics, cross country,wrestling.

women required sports: basketball,volleyball, softball, cross country, track and field,golf, tennis, soccer
 

St. Cloud dropped football for hockey. North Dakota dropped baseball & Women's hockey just to name a few. Any others?
Student enrollment issues there like many colleges are facing are even causing some academic cuts. Not a good example, IMHO.
 

St. Cloud dropped football for hockey. North Dakota dropped baseball & Women's hockey just to name a few. Any others?
St Cloud went D1 in hockey 1986. The football program didn’t dissolve until 2020. 34 seasons of having both so no St Cloud didn’t get rid of football for hockey. They just don’t care about football. I would say they don’t care about basketball either but a lot less scholarships/costs. Also got rid of gold and added men’s soccer.
 

Only football and mens basketball are profitable. Others mght be close. Football is the problem. Money maker but 85 scholarships.


Better to establish a set of required sports for each conference and a set of optional sports Based on all sports but football. To meet titleIX the equivalence in net money is given to cover womens sports. No sense forcing ice hockey where it is not wanted. Perhaps say that each major conference must have 10 mens and 10 womens sports. No major status if less. If a team offers less than minimum they get no TV money.Given the large TV money availlible should be workable. Number of sports up to discussion.

Required sports

Men Required: Football, Basketball, Track and Field ,golf Preferred options: Hockey, baseball, soccer, tennis, volleyball, gymnastics, cross country,wrestling.

women required sports: basketball,volleyball, softball, cross country, track and field,golf, tennis, soccer
It's been a while since I've seen the revenue numbers but mens hockey is definitely profitable at the U. I believe women's volleyball also consistently makes money and the women's basketball team can make money when they are good. Women's hockey also may at least break even.
 



With the rising costs, expenses of sport programs, travel, athletes & facilities. When will colleges start eliminating the negative revenue programs? Taking from the financial successful to the financial failures can last so long. Title IX is changing.
Hopefully never! With a daughter running track for the Gophers I am glad tile IX is here to stay. The gifted men and women in non revenue sports deserve to compete after high school just like the revenue sports. With the millions coming in these BIG colleges can figure it out. It is unfortunate the U dropped men’s indoor track, which makes no sense as it virtually costs nothing in the grand scheme of things. It has to hurt recruiting
 
Last edited:

It's been a while since I've seen the revenue numbers but mens hockey is definitely profitable at the U. I believe women's volleyball also consistently makes money and the women's basketball team can make money when they are good. Women's hockey also may at least break even.
Is men’s hockey really profitable though? I don’t know how many scholarships they give for sure 18-20? Lots of travel and equipment and ice expense…
 

Not how it works. B1g network televised LOTS of men’s and women’s games. They NEED the content provided by non-revenue so they can make enough PROFIT to shell out all those millions to each conference member school.

Title IX is here to stay. Thankfully, Title Ix and non-revenue generally are fairly cheap off-setters that help sports like football stay around.
How much does wrestling cost to run and how much does it bring in?

There is more to B1G sports than just football and basketball sports fans!

:0)
Wrestling here, probably not that much. Wrestling at Iowa...a ton. Swap hockey here vs. wrestling at other schools. Some schools women's volleyball is huge (Nebraska comes to mind) and basketball does very well and makes a profit. Football is the engine that drives the athletic department for most schools though.
 

Multiple posters have said Title IX is here to stay which is technically true. But many legal experts have said if football moves to an official pay for play, they will more than likely not be subject to the calculation. Even if it is just the 85 football scholarships that means a boatload of womens sports gone.
 

Is men’s hockey really profitable though? I don’t know how many scholarships they give for sure 18-20? Lots of travel and equipment and ice expense…
At Minnesota it is very profitable. Maybe not at other schools that have lower attendance though.
 

With the rising costs, expenses of sport programs, travel, athletes & facilities. When will colleges start eliminating the negative revenue programs? Taking from the financial successful to the financial failures can last so long. Title IX is changing.
Football should lose 10-15 scholarships.
 

What I know is this:

If a parent has two elementary school kids, one a boy and one a girl, they both get to play sports if they want. Kids do not have to be boys to play sports. The battle over this was settled a long time ago. It's ancient history now. Equal opportunity. Our daughters, wives, neighbors, girlfriends, cousins, co-workers, classmates don't have to be boys to play sports. It's ridiculous to think otherwise. This is now an old issue.

Now, getting into details and so forth are open for debate. Like why has fan attendance for some women's sports failed to catch hold. Why do so many women prefer men's sports if they do follow sports, except often women are not interested in sports. No law can make people like or not like things and what they spend their money on. Why are women coaches paid less? Well, it's complicated. You can't force people to be fans and willingly pay for sports unless they want to.

U of Minnesota is a bit complicated because the student body is lopsided female vs male. It's fair to ask why. Scholarships then get allocated based on the student body, lopsided towards a female student body.

All things considered, Minnesota has done a good job with this issue.

I do not miss men's gymnastics. I don't want that back. Who cares.

I think people are fair to criticize the half-cut to men's track. It's fair to ask for that back.

And then a can of worms gets opened. Should swim and dive be cut? Let's build a budget from scratch and pretend we didn't build building for sports we should cut now or build new fields and buildings for new ones.

One last thought: The Republicans last election ran a guy for Minnesota governor who said raped women can't get an abortion, no exceptions for even rape. Swing voters would never elect someone to office believing that. That includes voters who are a bit conservative on social issues.

The issue of equality in sports was settled a long time ago, so I would caution debaters to start with that affirmation before arguing over budget details and so forth. In fact, I don't think anyone actually argues against Title IX, right? It's more about budget arguments.

So be careful arguing this issue because you first need to start with the notion of equal opportunity as how we are as a society to start with. And then it's fair to have debate over budgets and so forth.
 
Last edited:

Here's the thing:

lot of these sports are relatively very cheap. Track and field? If you've got a nice stadium, which we just built a brand new one, then your costs are almost nothing. Shoes, mainly.

You just need a good training facility and you're set.

Same exact thing with swiming & diving. We already have a top notch Aquatic Center and that's not changing. So it only costs you ... swim suits, caps, goggles, at that point. Peanuts.


BUT, this mainly makes sense if conferences for those sports are regional. Now suddenly you've got the track and field team at Stanford going to the Atlantic Coast to have track meets.

The swim team at UCLA going to Rutgers for a swim meet.

Because of football.

F'ing stupid
 


It's been a while since I've seen the revenue numbers but mens hockey is definitely profitable at the U. I believe women's volleyball also consistently makes money and the women's basketball team can make money when they are good. Women's hockey also may at least break even.
Volleyball is nowhere near close to profitable.
 

Is men’s hockey really profitable though? I don’t know how many scholarships they give for sure 18-20? Lots of travel and equipment and ice expense…
At Minnesota it is very profitable. Maybe not at other schools that have lower attendance though.
While profitable, Men's Hockey is not really a cash cow.

From an interview Lou Nanne did on the radio, the move from the WCHA to the Big 10 caused Gopher Puck to lose a big chunk of their TV rights that then FSN was paying them, more than $1M. Also attendance suffered.

This is data from 2019. Men's Hockey took in $5.6M revenue with $5.3M in expenses. Perhaps the attendance rebound last year has gotten the profit back to nearly seven figures, but I would guess more around $500,000 - $600,000.

 
Last edited:

Which non revenue generating sport did you last watch live or on TV? Were curious about the score? If it does not have a betting line is it still a sport? Is it more exciting to watch than Bass fishing, Texas Holdem or watching paint dry? if not it's not a sport, just God's way to punish parents.
 

St. Cloud dropped football for hockey. North Dakota dropped baseball & Women's hockey just to name a few. Any others?
Wisconsin dropped baseball years ago too. Realistically, it's tough for northern schools to field baseball teams. The season is short and the weather makes it difficult. The U has a better situation than most since US Bank was built in a way to accomodate early season college baseball.
 

While profitable, Men's Hockey is not really a cash cow.

Pre-Big 10 Puck from an interview Lou Nanne did on the radio, that caused the Gophers to lose a big chunk of their TV rights that then FSN was paying them, more than $1M. Also attendance suffered.

This is data from 2019. Men's Hockey took in $5.6M revenue with $5.3M in expenses. Perhaps the attendance rebound last year has gotten the profit back to nearly seven figures, but I would guess more around $500,000 - $600,000.

Yeah, depending where I look I am seeing different numbers. One place I saw didn't have any TV money for Gopher hockey though, which doesn't make sense.
 

Which non revenue generating sport did you last watch live or on TV? Were curious about the score? If it does not have a betting line is it still a sport? Is it more exciting to watch than Bass fishing, Texas Holdem or watching paint dry? if not it's not a sport, just God's way to punish parents.

Keep trying! Sometimes trolling isn't as easy as it looks. :party:
 

Yeah, depending where I look I am seeing different numbers. One place I saw didn't have any TV money for Gopher hockey though, which doesn't make sense.
They are getting something the local Fox affiliates (Ch 9 & 29) for some of their home games.

$300,000? Just guessing.
 

They are getting something the local Fox affiliates (Ch 9 & 29) for some of their home games.

$300,000? Just guessing.
They should be getting money from BTN too. Although I'm sure the profits were better before BTN existed and we had the FSN deal.
 




Top Bottom