Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by costanzaDynasty 860 days ago
What they should be selling is a sport franchise license. Disconnect sports from the university but keep the facade. Let another entity incur the costs that will be coming down the road but still get the other benefits, financial and otherwise. I'd love to say that this would bring down the cost of an education but I wasn't born yesterday.
1 comments

I thought college sports are often profitable (or at least not that expensive) at least partially since not paying athletes saves them a lot of money
Most university athletic programs are unprofitable, if examined solely through the lens of outlays vs direct revenue. It's of course harder to measure the consequences on recruitment, alumni attachment to the school, etc.

https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-explain-it-me/shou...

> The 2020 report found only 25 Division I programs had revenues exceeding expenses. No Division II or III program had revenues exceeding expenses. There are 1,102 Division I, II and III schools.

I was active in budget committees as a student, and while my alma mater was in Division I, it was always in the red. It's a really hard decision for the student services committee every year to raise fees or cut funding, and the pressure from the athletics program to cut their budget last was intense. We tried to keep fee increases at or under the "higher education price index", but that itself is a flawed measure as it consistently is greater than CPI.

The not paying college students thing is changing a lot with new name and likeness rules