After conducting an analysis of descriptive statistics, as found in Table I, the results reveal that $224.6 million dollars (M=$4.16 million, SD=$2.99 million) was spent across the 54 multimedia rights agreements during the 2015-2016 school year. The smallest financial payout is $375,000 and belongs to Northern Illinois, while the largest contract $12,358,087 million, belonging to the University of Texas. The disparity among institutions becomes more evident when analyzing the multimedia rights contracts. Of the $224.6 million dollars spent during the 2015-2016 season, $182.3 million was spent on institutions who compete in one of the “Power 5” conferences, meaning that the 31 “Power 5” institutions in this study receive 81.2% of the …show more content…
In terms of total spending, IMG is followed by Learfield (sum = $82.3 million), JMI (sum = $11.9 million). It is important to note that JMI is relatively new when it comes to college multimedia rights contracts, and only has two institution, which is reflected in their low total payout. However, as illustrated in Table VI, JMI has a higher average payout than the two larger companies, IMG and Learfield, (M=$5.93 million, SD= $4.7 million). JMI will see an increase in their average payout during the 2016-2017 as well as during the 2017-2018 seasons with addition of Clemson who will make $2.6 million to $7.7 million during the respective seasons. IMG and Learfield are relatively similar in average payouts, with IMG averaging $4.53 million (SD = $3.52 million) and Learfield averaging $3.74 million (SD= $1.87 million). IMG and Learfield, both with over 20 contracts a piece have a far greater range of contract sizes, with IMG controlling both the smallest payout, $375,000, and the largest payout, $12.36 million. The variables outlined in Table VII were used in an attempt to explain the effect that numerous factors have on the guaranteed rights fee that a university receives from a third party rights holder. Those variables were separated into four categories; property-related, football performance, basketball performance, and demand indicators. From there, a Pearson product-moment correlation was applied
The NCAA has been around and evolved since the beginning of college sports. This organization is a non-profitable organization, but ironically makes more than millions of profit per year. Branch states “that money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contract”(pg. 228). Meanwhile, the student-athletes do not receive any of this money. This is the start of an unsubstantial business between universities built around amateurism.
College athletics is a billion dollar industry and has been for a long time. Due to the increasing ratings of college athletics, this figure will continue to rise. It’s simple: bigger, faster, stronger athletes will generate more money. College Universities generate so much revenue during the year that it is only fair to the players that they get a cut. College athletes should get paid based on the university’s revenue, apparel sales, and lack of spending money.
The latest information it reported to the U.S. Department of Education showed that during the 2011-2012 school year, the university spent $25.8 million on its football team and that football team returned $103.8 million in revenues. One reason that contributed to the extraordinary return on investment was a 20-year, $300 million contract signed with ESPN in 2011 to create the Longhorn Network, which is a new telecasting arm for all Texas sports. Another factor was licensing royalties Texas earned for selling its logo and burnt orange color on merchandise, which, for an eighth consecutive year, was the top-selling college merchandise in what is a $4.6 billion industry nationwide.
With the universities pulling in more than twelve billion dollars, the rate of growth for college athletics surpasses companies like McDonalds and Chevron (Finkel, 2013). The athletes claim they are making all the money, but do not see a dime of this revenue. The age-old notion that the collegiate athletes are amateurs and students, binds them into not being paid by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). This pay for play discussion has been talked about since the early 1900s but recently large steps are being made to actually make a change. There are many perspectives on the payment of collegiate student athletes coming from the NCAA, the athletes themselves, and the university officials.
Colleges bring an incredible amount of money by their sport teams alones. According to John Brill, a sports journalist writer, “College football and basketball generate more than the National Basketball Association, a total of more than $6 billion yearly.” The money made from these sporting events are not being used correctly which is frustrating many college athletes. The money that is being
College athletics is a very diverse organization involving a lot of students, mainly as the players, and non-students such as officials, coaches and others. The leading governing body for college athletics is the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA. College sports is itself a big industry involving sponsorships, TV networks, endorsements, retail products and marketing. But in spite of it being a big business, the players are not compensated for the work they deliver. This opens up two opinions: should players be paid, or should they not? Kristi Dosh’s article, “The Problems With Paying College Athletes”, (UNCLEAR)discusses where the coaches’ money come from to pay student athletes. On the other hand, Mark Cassell’s article, “College Athletes Should Be Able To Negotiate Compensation”, debates how athletes should be able to negotiate their compensation. This paper will evaluate the evidence of both Dosh and Cassell in order to determine which argument is more effective.
College athletics for some schools are what brings in the most revenues in terms of category. These college athletes that attend these schools are able to generate millions to billions of dollars from viewers, sponsorships, and fans. “The 231 NCAA Division I schools with data available generated a total of $9.15 billion in revenue during the 2015 fiscal year. But while there are 24 schools that make more than $100 million” (Gaines,Cork). This data provides the evidence that the top generating schools has the capabilities to pay their athletes, yet they do not. John Bill an expert believes the NCAA should pay college athletes. Bill explains, “The promise of a free education is not enough anymore if the NCAA wants to act as a money making business, and not reward those who help make it profitable” (Bill,John). The NCAA has evolved to be a professional league on its own. For the amount of revenue they will be earning it is comparable to the
The popularity of college sports and its value to entertainment is skyrocketing. The NCAA is the head organization in control of a hundred billion dollar industry. The disgusting disparity arrives at the difference between what
In the article titled, Why College Athletes Should Be Paid , Tyson Hartnett discusses how the NCAA signed a 14 year deal with CBS for 10.8 billion dollars. As a result, the NCAA has
College athletics assume a large role in the entertainment industry of America. Each week, millions of people tune in to watch their favorite team, buy tickets to go to the games, or spend money on university athletic merchandise to show their pride. The NCAA and universities benefit enormously from college sports. The top 10 total revenues generated by universities were all well over the $100,000,000 mark in 2012 (“College Finances 2012”). The University of Texas tops the list with $163,295,115 total revenue from athletics (“College Finances 2012”). Last football season, Texas A&M University quarterback Johnny Manziel won the Heisman Trophy. As the first freshman to ever win the trophy, he propagated over 1.8 million media impressions which translated to $37 million of media exposure (Cook). The University’s licensing revenue jumped 23% this past year due to the success of one player (Cook). The NCAA itself generated $871,600,000 in revenue from the championship games (“College Finances 2012”). All of this revenue is impossible without the student-athletes. The NCAA is strict on making sure that athletes should be treated no different from any other student (Blias). However, the athletes are involved in a heavily commercialized multi-billion dollar industry. As amateurs, athletes remain restricted solely to scholarships as the only form
His statistics show the outlandish amount of money that is generated by big-time college sports, often disputed by the NCAA. Not having enough money to pay athletes what they deserve has been one of the biggest arguments from universities and colleges for many years. However, Eitzen’s article and the statics he provides proves that these big-time sports programs generate more than enough to compensate their athletes more than what they receive from athletic scholarships. One statistic he provides states that “The NCAA has signed a 6.2 trillion dollar, 11 year deal giving CBS [Columbia Broadcasting System] the right to televise its men’s basketball championship. (That’s 5.45 million dollars a year, up from 2.16 million with the arrangement that ended in 2002)” (Eitzen 3). This statistic does not include the money the NCAA generates from advertising and ticket sales from the tournament. Athletes see none of this money. According to Eitzen, the athletes and their performance are the reason all this money is being made, yet they are not rewarded for their efforts. Eitzen states that these athletes are being served another injustice by witnessing their coaches benefit from all their hard work. He writes about a set of unfair regulations the NCAA has created in order to keep big-time college sports “amateur”. The regulations state, “They may receive only educational benefits (i.e., room, board, tuition, fees, and books); cannot sign with an agent and retain eligibility;
The NCAA generates billions of dollars a year in revenue, through exploiting their athletes, and demeaning higher educations making them one of the most powerful and dangerous organizations in sports. The total annual revenue of the NCAA is $10.6 billion. very year, individually, every large Division I Men’s basketball school makes about $10.1 million dollars, and every large conference football school makes around $15.8 million per year (“NCAA College”). That revenue is split between a variety of things such as: ticket sales, tv and apparel contracts, and other merchandise sales (“NCAA College”). Perhaps the most profitable part of the NCAA is the television contracts. In 1961, Byers, then the commissioner of the NCAA, hired chief lobbyist
College athletics is a very diverse organization involving a lot of students, mainly as the players, and non-students such as officials, coaches and others. The leading governing body for college athletics is the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA. College sports is itself a big industry involving sponsorships, TV networks, endorsements, retail products and marketing. But in spite of it being a big business, the players are not compensated for the work they deliver. This opens up two opinions: should players be paid, or should they not? Kristi Dosh’s article, “The Problems With Paying College Athletes”, discusses the various problems with paying college athletes, and the biggest question being where will the money come from. On
“ Louisville men's basketball player Kevin Ware's gruesome injury Sunday evening did not just mean the end of his season and, potentially, his basketball career. It also puts at risk his college education and could leave Ware and his family responsible for medical bills related to an injury that Ware sustained while helping make his university millions of dollars.” “http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kevin-ware-injury-could-put-scholarship-at-risk/BRIAN MONTOPOLI ”. The fact that the NCAA brings in hundreds of millions of dollars shows that they have the money somewhere to provide the athletes with the type of insurance they need. “ The National Collegiate Athletic Association, the largest collegiate sports organization in the United States, oversees much of the business of American college sports. For 2011-12, the NCAA reported $871.6 million in revenue-- 81 percent of which came from a broadcast rights agreement with Turner/CBS Sports. Another 11 percent came from sponsoring championships, such as the annual "March Madness" basketball tournament. The NCAA distributes roughly 60 percent of its revenues among Division I schools to help fund athletic departments and scholarships.” “http://finance.zacks.com/much-money-college-sports-generate-10346.html by Scott Morgan, Demand Media” Below is a visual representation of, “. For 2011-12, the NCAA reported $871.6 million in revenue-- 81 percent of which came from a broadcast rights agreement with Turner/CBS Sports. Another 11 percent came from sponsoring championships, such as the annual "March Madness" basketball
The NCAA’s greatest fear about paying student athletes is the money itself. They worry it will be spread thin between all the sports departments, but with all the money circulating around the college sports industry, they should not have any concerns. The two most popular college sports, football and men’s basketball, generate over $6 billion in annual revenue combined; more than the amount the National