Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics

Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics

welcomeaboutaboutcontact us
Athlete Photo Gallery

Welcome, Guest!

(Log in / Register)

image

COMMISSION REPORTS

View All Reports

Keeping Faith with the Student Athlete
The Knight Commission's Groundbreaking Report

A Call to Action
A Call to Action: Reconnecting College Sports and Higher Education

COMMISSION MEETINGS

PUBLISHED OP-EDS

Los Angeles Times
Aug. 30, 2008

Miami Herald
Feb. 4, 2007

Indianapolis Star
Apr. 2, 2006

COMMISSIONED RESEARCH AND POLLS

WHITE PAPERS

Athletics Recruiting and Academic Values: Enhancing Transparency, Spreading Risk and Improving Practice
University of Georgia Institute for Higher Education

Challenging the Myth
A Review of the Links Among College Athletic Success, Student Quality and Donations by Robert H. Frank

Executive Summary Division I-A Postseason History and Status

Division I-A Postseason History and Status
by John Sandbrook

NCAA’s financial picture receives concern from media

Several recently published articles help identify concerns about the financial nature of intercollegiate athletics in response to the NCAA’s recent financial report, “2004-06 NCAA Revenues and Expenses of Division I Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Report.” The NCAA’s report demonstrated the median net deficit in generated revenues for Division I-A programs increased from $5.9 million in 2003-04 to $7.3 million in 2005-06, and between 2004 and 2006, Division I-A median revenues grew by 16 percent while median costs increased by 23 percent. 

In Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal (subscription required), Andrew Zimbalist notes that the NCAA’s reported financial picture may be worse in reality for several reasons: 1) an increase in athletic giving from 14.7 percent in 1998 to 26 percent in 2003 may diminish general fund giving, leading to a deeper burden on an institution’s finances; 2) the report failed to include amount of compensation to non-athletic college administrators as athletics expenses; 3) and, the report’s lack of inclusion of capital expenses.  Doug Lederman of Inside Higher Education reported the trend between the haves and have-nots seems to be expanding, that “the 16 programs that generated more than they spent, the average new revenue was $4.3 million, while the average loss of those with negative net revenue was $8.9 million. That $13 million difference suggests a widening gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ in big-time college football, as the equivalent gap in 2004 was about $11.3 million.” And, Steve Berkowitz of the USA Today interviewed Stan Nosek, vice chancellor of administration at the University of California-Davis and a member of the NCAA Task Force Oversight Committee.  Nosek identified the growing concern among presidents about fully understanding how much their schools are subsidizing athletics, because “when some programs require more institutional support, it takes away from the core mission.”

Posted on 5/19/08 in MediaEducatorsPermalink

    Add Your Comment

    Name:

    Email:

    URL:

    Remember my personal information?

    Notify me when others comment on this article?

    Submit the word you see below: