WAG Will rising attendance lead to more college programs?

[TumbleTimes4]

I was watching the PAC 12 and listening to the commentators talk about the record breaking attendance Oklahoma has enjoyed this year. I know Utah and UCLA typically enjoy large crowds as well. I know there are a host of things that often dictate and determine how colleges add programs, but with the rise of attendance and the viral videos like Ohashi’s, do you think in the future more colleges will consider adding a gymnastics program?

 

[Muddlethru]

I’d like to hope so but I don’t think it will; at least not of any significant number. Unlike other sports, gymnastics require more equipment and a designated place to practice which can’t be shared with another sport. Also aside from the top teams, attendance at other team meets are not significant. NCAA gymnastics as a whole is really not a high revenue sport.

In 2003, there were around 89 teams (DI, II, III). From 2004-2007, the number dropped to 86. From 2008-2012, roughly one team dropped every year. By 2012, there were 82 teams. Wilson College created a team in 2003 raising the number briefly to 83. They got rid of the program the following year and 82 team remained until the present day. It will drop down to 81 (UIC) lowest in history since gymnastics was introduced as an NCAA championship sport in 1982.

However, I think we will see perhaps an increase in college Acro & Tumbling teams. There is already a significant increase in teams from last year. It is also easier on the body and less number skills required. Many DII are recruiting L9.

 

[Flyaway]

Sadly I don't think so. I don't think you can count the crowd at the Oklahoma/UCLA showdown as anything other than an outlier. It's not an example of a rising standard.

Now if you started to see an increase in attendance at D2 or D3 meets, then there might be hope.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Nope

 

[sce]

Unless it starts to rival basketball and football in the money it brings to schools, then it probably will not make a difference.

 

[LemonLime]

Ticket sales for NCAA gymnastics meets are largely irrelevant. Selling 1 million tickets or 2 tickets will not matter to the overall survival or founding of female gymnastics programs. NCAA Women's Gymnastics is a large, vibrant program, however, because 1) it spreads goodwill for its universities, and 2) because of Title IX.

Female gymnastics teams are very important for spreading the goodwill of athletic programs. No administration would focus solely on money-making male sports to the exclusion of money-losing female sports in 2019. Due to amateurism rules which particularly limit gymnasts because of the age they peak as athletes, many immediately-past Olympians, most national team members, and nearly all JO Champions end up in the NCAA. This quality and notoriety sparkles. I'm not immune to the benefits of a large and passionate fan-base for women's NCAA. Fans buy tickets, t-shirts, watch TV and some make donations. Even so, this income is only a drop in the bucket compared to expenses.

The (by far) main reason NCAA female gymnastics teams survive and are founded is Title IX. Gymnastics is not only a Title IX sport, but it's also one of the three D1 female head-count sports. The OU women's gymnastics team is arguably one of the most successful programs over the last five years. I'm not an accountant, but I Iooked up the numbers I heard around 10 years ago and they remain consistent. The OU Women's Gymnastics team costs 3 million per year and earns $290,000 per year. OU is not an outlier financially and reflects the general P&L gap in this sport. Perhaps we should feel comfortable that softball loses more! These losses are irrelevant, however, because women's gymnastics helps create legal parity overall with highly lucrative men's athletic programs. http://image.cdnllnwnl.xosnetwork.com/pdf9/5478481.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=31000

Title IX has been overwhelmingly positive to athletic and education excellence for young women and female coaches, but Title IX parity rarely is a proxy for financial parity. Women's gymnastics offers more than money to a university, however, and that's a great thing.

(I would be happier if athletes in sports which have no wage income potential post-NCAA -- like gymnastics -- would be exempt from NCAA amateurism rules, but that's a different issue)

 

[doublestrike]

Ticket sales for NCAA gymnastics meets are largely irrelevant. Selling 1 million tickets or 2 tickets will not matter to the overall survival or founding of female gymnastics programs. NCAA Women's Gymnastics is a large, vibrant program, however, because 1) it spreads goodwill for its universities, and 2) because of Title IX.

Female gymnastics teams are very important for spreading the goodwill of athletic programs. No administration would focus solely on money-making male sports to the exclusion of money-losing female sports in 2019. Due to amateurism rules which particularly limit gymnasts because of the age they peak as athletes, many immediately-past Olympians, most national team members, and nearly all JO Champions end up in the NCAA. This quality and notoriety sparkles. I'm not immune to the benefits of a large and passionate fan-base for women's NCAA. Fans buy tickets, t-shirts, watch TV and some make donations. Even so, this income is only a drop in the bucket compared to expenses.

The (by far) main reason NCAA female gymnastics teams survive and are founded is Title IX. Gymnastics is not only a Title IX sport, but it's also one of the three D1 female head-count sports. The OU women's gymnastics team is arguably one of the most successful programs over the last five years. I'm not an accountant, but I Iooked up the numbers I heard around 10 years ago and they remain consistent. The OU Women's Gymnastics team costs 3 million per year and earns $290,000 per year. OU is not an outlier financially and reflects the general P&L gap in this sport. Perhaps we should feel comfortable that softball loses more! These losses are irrelevant, however, because women's gymnastics helps create legal parity overall with highly lucrative men's athletic programs. http://image.cdnllnwnl.xosnetwork.com/pdf9/5478481.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=31000

Title IX has been overwhelmingly positive to athletic and education excellence for young women and female coaches, but Title IX parity rarely is a proxy for financial parity. Women's gymnastics offers more than money to a university, however, and that's a great thing.

(I would be happier if athletes in sports which have no wage income potential post-NCAA -- like gymnastics -- would be exempt from NCAA amateurism rules, but that's a different issue)

What are the other two head count sports? My non-gym friends are always puzzled when I say that gymnastics is a head count sport. Do you know if a team like Utah or UCLA break even at least?

 

[wandrewsjr]

Tennis, volleyball and basketball. I actually looked it up after reading Lemonlimes response because it got me interested!

 

[tomtnt]

No teams break even.

And regarding Title IX, it’s a lot cheaper to sponsor a women’s beach volleyball, crew, acro/tumbling, cross country running team than gymnastics.. (equipment, coaching, injuries)

 

[LemonLime]

I could not find many EADA reports because only very limited information is required to be published on the federal site. https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/institution/details

The gymnastics Utes cost 2.6 million per year, and earn around $900,000. Their shortfall is 1.5 million annually. $900,000 seems like a great revenue stream to me, but the sport is expensive. https://utahutes.com/documents/2019/1/24//FY18_NCAA_Revenue_Expense_Report.pdf?id=17167

 

[wandrewsjr]

$900,000 sounds like about what Utes would make from tickets sales. Do the PAC 12 schools(or SEC) not make any TV money?

 

[LemonLime]

$900,000 sounds like about what Utes would make from tickets sales. Do the PAC 12 schools(or SEC) not make any TV money?

I'll see what I can find. The Utes earned $545,000 in ticket sales.

 

[LemonLime]

https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/sports/lsu/article_4c0d3428-2594-11e9-a68a-476082c07cb9.html

Talking about 2018:

"Coach D-D Breaux and her gymnastics team took a step back in overall revenue, but ticket sales are continuing to surge. The LSU gym program saw an 18 percent increase in ticket sales last year, but its revenue fell 18 percent to $506,535 in 2017-18, a season in which the program finished fourth at the national championships. The gymnastics program lost $2.4 million because of its $2.9 million in spending, and out of LSU’s 14 other sports outside of football, men’s basketball and baseball, 11 of the sports lost more than $1 million. Women’s basketball was deepest in the red, drawing a $4.2 million loss.

Overall, the largest sources of revenue in the LSU athletic budget are from ticket sales ($40.3 million), media rights ($38.9 million) — $15 million of which LSU received from the SEC Network — and contributions ($33.2 million)."

 

[tomtnt]

Again with regards to Title IX, I worry about the schools which currently sponsors both men and wormen’s Programs. Due to Title IX, tough to just drop women’a Gym but if an AD is tasked to save bunch of money, it would be tempting to drop both men and women’s gym. It’s what UIC did and what cal almost did few years ago

 

[sce]

Again with regards to Title IX, I worry about the schools which currently sponsors both men and wormen’s Programs. Due to Title IX, tough to just drop women’a Gym but if an AD is tasked to save bunch of money, it would be tempting to drop both men and women’s gym. It’s what UIC did and what cal almost did few years ago

And there are so few men's programs it is truly painful to lsoe any of the remaining ones.