Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/5/24 at 9:56 am to Landmass
My bet is things are going to get very ugly soon. The domino will fall where women's sports will start losing faster than men's so there will be a Title IX suit come in. That is where the courts determine how or even if sports with athletes as employees even should be considered under that umbrella.
I think corporate sponsors or donors are going to be needed to keep the non revenue sports alive and the perks that those athletes get out of the school are going to be dramatically cut.
I think corporate sponsors or donors are going to be needed to keep the non revenue sports alive and the perks that those athletes get out of the school are going to be dramatically cut.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:00 am to kywildcatfanone
quote:
You can have facilities or one year players. You can't have both.
Our facilities are predominantly financed by donors/boosters (e.g., the 12th Man Foundation), so I don’t see those projects ceasing construction anytime soon. NIL is another fund entirely. I’d assume other universities operate similarly?
I can’t speak to the culling of certain sports … tho I wouldn’t be sad to see swimming & diving, equestrian, softball, and/or women’s hoops quietly go away.
Posted on 6/5/24 at 10:01 am to Landmass
Doesn’t football and basketball pretty much fund all the other sports? I feel like most of them result in a loss financially. I get that they’re trying to mitigate losses but how much does something like women’s lacrosse really cut into finances?
Seems like if they wanted to really mitigate losses they’d have to cut off something they’re putting a LOT of money into and getting very little back. I just don’t see them cutting all these little sports that cost very little. I mean, they could cut all of those sports and make a dent but, all the backlash? I just don’t see schools cutting non revenue sports en masse because most of them are non revenue.
Seems like if they wanted to really mitigate losses they’d have to cut off something they’re putting a LOT of money into and getting very little back. I just don’t see them cutting all these little sports that cost very little. I mean, they could cut all of those sports and make a dent but, all the backlash? I just don’t see schools cutting non revenue sports en masse because most of them are non revenue.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News