American Athletic Conference Revenues
For my fourth genre I chose to help Dr. Staurowsky update her study on the finances of the NCAA and college athletes. The research that I have helped her with will be used to update the information regarding the amount of money that conferences and schools generate from Men's Basketball and Football. These two sports are far and away the largest generators of revenue in college sports, but yet some schools report no profit in these two sports. This can be accredited to shifting revenue from these two sports to other less popular sports in order to make them appear less profitable. This is often not the case, especially at schools in power conferences like the SEC or the Big Ten. The AAC however is not considered a power conference, and some schools don't record profit in either sport. The information that I found while doing this research is not necessarily "groundbreaking," but it will help shed light on how much profit and revenue DI schools report in the two most popular college sports. This information will be useful for Dr. Staurowsky's study because it will show whether or not DI schools can afford to compensate athletes with the amount of money that their sports generate.
AAC | |
File Size: | 4 kb |
File Type: | xlsx |
NCAAW Revenues and Expenses
For my fifth and final genre, I helped Dr. Staurowsky with another chunk of research. The second chunk of data that I retrieved involved the revenues and expenses of women's basketball across the NCAA. NCAA women's basketball is gaining mainstream popularity fast, and some schools are even starting to record profits from the women's basketball program. Schools like Stanford and Tennessee have more notable women's basketball programs than men's programs, and the revenues are starting to reflect this. In recent history, all women's basketball programs were in the red, and were forced to piggyback off of profits from men's basketball and football. While the vast majority of women's programs still generate less revenue than what's needed to cover their expenses, seeing some programs generate profits is huge for the progress in equality of sports. The research that I did will have the chance to be fuel in the fire to compensate women athletes as well as male athletes. Previous to these programs recording profits, the fight to compensate athletes has been male centered completely. Seeing that certain programs like Stanford's women's basketball generate mass profits will force the issue of compensating women athletes alike.
NCAAW | |
File Size: | 7 kb |
File Type: | xlsx |
Interview Write Up
I conducted my interview with the head of sports management at Drexel University, Dr. Ellen Staurowsky. Dr. Staurowsky is debatably the most informed professor in the world on the issue of compensating NCAA athletes. Her research is essentially what inspired me to do my senior project on the topic. The interview with her only made me more passionate about the topic, and gave me an even greater understanding of the issue.
The interview was conducted in early November over the phone and in front of a computer with data on it. We opened up with small talk about the cold weather here in Bozeman, and then started going over a project that I’m planning to help Dr. Staurowsky with. She gave me a website that has all information on sports finances around the country and described what I would be doing for the project. My role is to look over the finances for the AAC and record the generated income from the football and basketball programs for each school. This collected data will help in updating her previous research and publishing more recent information on college sports finances. After going over the project, we just started talking about the issue of compensating athletes.
While I did have scripted questions, I have to admit, I don’t think I used a single one in my interview. It wasn’t really much of an interview at all, it felt more like an intriguing talk with an expert in the field. We covered several topics that gave me a lot of insight on the issue and confirmed my beliefs. First, we talked about college sports as a whole and how they have changed over time. We both agreed that the amount of money that is now flowing through the NCAA makes it qualify as a business. She talked about how the sports have changed, but the NCAA hasn’t changed to accommodate the amount of revenue generated by the sports. Next, we talked about the progress that is being made on the front of compensating athletes. We shared some statistics about how many hours athletes work each week, and found it incredible that they weren’t considered employees for the forty plus hours they put in each week. We talked about the court decisions that may change this in the near future as well. I learned that Dr. Staurowsky testified in the O’Bannon case last August, and she described the trial to me in a fair amount of detail, giving me a greater understanding. The last major topic that we touched on was the arguments against paying athletes. I had come into the interview confused on why the NCAA is trying to preserve amateurism, and Dr. Staurowsky shed some light on the subject. She said that the NCAA has dug itself into a deep hole with lawsuits in the previous years regarding amateurism, so there is nowhere for it to go except deeper in the hole. In fact, the NCAA’s regulation of amateurism changes throughout sports and divisions. For example, In D3 tennis, athletes are allowed to have competed for money before entering college, whereas in D1 football or basketball, this is prohibited. She said that the NCAA refuses to let go of amateurism in money making sports, because it would change a century of rules that have generated mass profits for schools. While we talked about several other topics, these were the ones that I found most interesting.
I feel as though I interviewed the best possible person for my topic. It was awesome to hear from someone so knowledgeable on the topic, and someone that has true experience in the field of study. I am also very grateful that Dr. Staurowsky is allowing me to help briefly on her research; it is truly an honor. I hope to work more with Dr. Staurowsky in the next several months, and am overjoyed that she has offered to help me on my project.
The interview was conducted in early November over the phone and in front of a computer with data on it. We opened up with small talk about the cold weather here in Bozeman, and then started going over a project that I’m planning to help Dr. Staurowsky with. She gave me a website that has all information on sports finances around the country and described what I would be doing for the project. My role is to look over the finances for the AAC and record the generated income from the football and basketball programs for each school. This collected data will help in updating her previous research and publishing more recent information on college sports finances. After going over the project, we just started talking about the issue of compensating athletes.
While I did have scripted questions, I have to admit, I don’t think I used a single one in my interview. It wasn’t really much of an interview at all, it felt more like an intriguing talk with an expert in the field. We covered several topics that gave me a lot of insight on the issue and confirmed my beliefs. First, we talked about college sports as a whole and how they have changed over time. We both agreed that the amount of money that is now flowing through the NCAA makes it qualify as a business. She talked about how the sports have changed, but the NCAA hasn’t changed to accommodate the amount of revenue generated by the sports. Next, we talked about the progress that is being made on the front of compensating athletes. We shared some statistics about how many hours athletes work each week, and found it incredible that they weren’t considered employees for the forty plus hours they put in each week. We talked about the court decisions that may change this in the near future as well. I learned that Dr. Staurowsky testified in the O’Bannon case last August, and she described the trial to me in a fair amount of detail, giving me a greater understanding. The last major topic that we touched on was the arguments against paying athletes. I had come into the interview confused on why the NCAA is trying to preserve amateurism, and Dr. Staurowsky shed some light on the subject. She said that the NCAA has dug itself into a deep hole with lawsuits in the previous years regarding amateurism, so there is nowhere for it to go except deeper in the hole. In fact, the NCAA’s regulation of amateurism changes throughout sports and divisions. For example, In D3 tennis, athletes are allowed to have competed for money before entering college, whereas in D1 football or basketball, this is prohibited. She said that the NCAA refuses to let go of amateurism in money making sports, because it would change a century of rules that have generated mass profits for schools. While we talked about several other topics, these were the ones that I found most interesting.
I feel as though I interviewed the best possible person for my topic. It was awesome to hear from someone so knowledgeable on the topic, and someone that has true experience in the field of study. I am also very grateful that Dr. Staurowsky is allowing me to help briefly on her research; it is truly an honor. I hope to work more with Dr. Staurowsky in the next several months, and am overjoyed that she has offered to help me on my project.