Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study examines the impact of athletic expenditure on athletic performance among National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I institutions. A series of dynamic panel data models are estimated to explore differential impacts of expenditure throughout athletic programs. Results suggest that a dollar spent on women’s sport programs may be more effective than a dollar spent on men’s sport programs. Analysis is conducted at the aggregate, relative division, relative conference, and individual sport levels. Together, all analysis suggests that alternative distributions of athletic, financial resources could increase an institution’s athletic success.

Keywords

athletic expenditure athletic success dynamic panel data regression effective financial distributions

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

M. L.

(2012). The benefits of college athletic success: An application of the propensity score design with instrumental variables (No. w18196). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Baade

R. A.

Sundberg

J. O.

(1996). Fourth down and gold to go? Assessing the link between athletics and alumni giving. Social Science Quarterly, 77, 789–803.

Baum

C. F.

(2013). Dynamic panel data estimators. Retrieved from http://fmwww.bc.edu/EC-C/S2013/823/EC823.S2013.nn05.slides.pdf

Berkowitz

Schnaars

Upton

Hannan

Stern

Meyer

… Spencer

S. K.

(2016). NCAA finances: 2014–2015 Finances. USA Today Sports. Retrieved from http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Blundell

Bond

(1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87, 115–143.

Collier

Johnson

A. L.

Ruggiero

(2011). Measuring technical efficiency in sports. Journal of Sports Economics, 12, 579–598.

Fulks

D. L.

(2015). Revenues and expenses. 2004–2014: NCAA Division I Intercollegiate Athletic Programs report. The National Collegiate Athletic Association. Retrieved from http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2015%20Division%20I%20RE%20report.pdf

Humphreys

B. R.

Mondello

(2007). Intercollegiate athletic success and donations at NCAA Division I institutions. Journal of Sport Management, 21, 265.

Jones

W. A.

(2013). Exploring the relationship between intercollegiate athletic expenditures and team on-field success among NCAA Division I institutions. Journal of Sports Economics, 14, 584–605.

10.

Kashian

R. D.

Pagel

(2014). Measuring X-efficiency in NCAA Division III athletics. Journal of Sports Economics, 17, 558–577.

11.

Katz

Pfleegor

Schaeperkoetter

Bass

(2015). Factors for success in NCAA Division III athletics. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 8, 102–122.

12.

Lawrence

H. J.

(2007, 3 29). Intercollegiate athletic spending: An examination of gender specific expenditures. Paper presented at the meeting of the Girls and Women Rock Symposium celebrating the 35th Anniversary of Title IX, Cleveland, OH.

13.

Lawrence

H. J.

Regas

J. S.

Kander

(2012). National Association of collegiate directors of athletics directors’ cup standings: Predictors of success. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 5, 207–224.

14.

Litan

R. E.

Orszag

J. M.

Orszag

P. R.

(2003). The empirical effects of collegiate athletics: An interim report. Washington, DC: Sebago Associates.

15.

National Association of Collegiate Directors’ of Athletics. (2016). Learfield sports directors’ cup general information. Retrieved from http://www.nacda.com/directorscup/nacda-directorscup-previous-scoring.html

16.

Orszag

Israel

(2009). The empirical effects of collegiate athletics: An update based on 2004–2007 data. Washington, DC: Compass Lexicon Consulting.

17.

Orszag

J. M.

Orszag

P. R.

(2005). Empirical effects of Division II intercollegiate athletics. Washington, DC: Compass Lexicon.

18.

Osborne

(2004). Motivating college athletes. In Fizel

J. L.

Fort

(Eds.), Economics of college sports (pp. 51–62). Westport, CT: Praeger.

19.

Pope

D. G.

Pope

J. C.

(2008). The impact of college sports success on the quantity and quality of student applications. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 750–780.

20.

Roodman

(2006). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. Center for Global Development Working Paper (103), 103. Retrieved from https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/11619_file_HowtoDoxtabond8_with_foreword_0.pdf

21.

Sigelman

Bookheimer

(1983). Is it whether you win or lose? Monetary contributions to big-time college athletic programs. Social Science Quarterly, 64, 347.

22.

Smith

R. D.

(2008). Big-time college basketball and the advertising effect does success really matter? Journal of Sports Economics, 9, 387–406.

23.

Sparvero

E. S.

Warner

(2013). The price of winning and the impact on the NCAA community. Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, 6, 120–143.

24.

Steinbach

(2006). Do the right thing: Athletic departments that have dominated the Directors’ Cup have committed resources broadly, hired shrewdly and acted nobly. Athletic Business, 30, 44–52.

25.

Stinson

J. L.

Howard

D. R.

(2008). Winning does matter: Patterns in private giving to athletic and academic programs at NCAA Division I-AA and I-AAA institutions. Sport Management Review, 11, 1–20.

26.

Suggs

(2003). Sports as the university’s front porch? The public is skeptical. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 49, A17.

27.

Terry

Macy

Cooley

Peterson

(2014). Determinants of college basketball graduation rates. Journal of Economics and Economic Education Research, 15, 207.

28.

The Education Trust. (2016). College Results Online. Retrieved from http://www.collegeresults.org/default.aspx

29.

Turner

S. E.

Meserve

L. A.

Bowen

W. G.

(2001). Winning and giving: Football results and alumni giving at selective private colleges and universities. Social Science Quarterly, 82, 812–826.

30.

U.S. Department of Education. (2016). The equity in athletics data analysis cutting tool. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/Index.aspx

31.

Zimbalist

(1999). Unpaid professionals: Commercialism and conflict in big-time college sports. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Examining the Relationship Between Athletic Program Expenditure and Athletic Program Success Among NCAA Division I Institutions

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References