In 1987, the Southern Methodist University (SMU) football program received the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA’s) harshest penalty, often referred to as the “death penalty.” SMU was caught committing two or more major violations of NCAA rules in years. Therefore, under the repeat offender clause, their football program was terminated for the 1987–1988 school year, and they chose to take the next season off as well. In the years following the death penalty, the team struggled to find success. Using the synthetic control method, this article measures the cost of the death penalty in terms of athletic performance and the university’s finances.
AbadieA.GardeazabalJ. (2003). The economic costs of conflict: A case study of the Basque country. American Economic Review, 93(1), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455188
2.
AbadieA.DiamondA.HainmuellerJ. (2010). Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of California’s tobacco control program. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490), 493–505. https://doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2009.ap08746
3.
AbadieA.DiamondA.HainmuellerJ. (2015). Comparative politics and the synthetic control method. American Journal of Political Science, 59(2), 495–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12116
AxonR.BradyE. (2014). Did Penn State really face the death penalty? USA Today.
6.
BaxterV.LambertC. (1990). The National Collegiate Athletic Association and the governance of higher education. The Sociological Quarterly, 31(3), 403–421. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1990.tb00336.x
7.
BillmeierA.NanniciniT. (2013). Assessing economic liberalization episodes: A synthetic control approach. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(3), 983–1001. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00324
8.
ChressanthisG. A.GrimesP. W. (1993). Intercollegiate sports success and first-year student enrollment demand. Sociology of Sport Journal, 10(3), 286–300. https://doi.org/10.1123/SSJ.10.3.286
9.
CoughlinC. C.EreksonO. H. (1984). An examination of contributions to support intercollegiate athletics. Southern Economic Journal, 51(1), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.2307/1058331
10.
DepkinC. A.WilsonD. P. (2006). NCAA enforcement and competitive balance in college football. Southern Economic Journal, 72(4), 826–845. https://doi.org/10.2307/20111855
EggersA. F.GroothuisP. A.ReddingP.RotthofK. W.SoliminiM. (2020). Universities behaving badly: The impact of athletic malfeasance on student quality and enrollment. Journal of Sports Economics, 21(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002519859416
FreyJ. (1987). Institutional control of athletics: An analysis of the role played by presidents, faculty, trustees, alumni, and the NCAA. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 11(1–2), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/019372358701100104
16.
GrimesP. W.ChressanthisG. A. (1994). Alumni contributions to academics: The role of intercollegiate sports and NCAA sanctions. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 53(1), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1994.tb02669.x
17.
GroothuisP. A.EggersA. F.ReddingP. (2019). The impact of NCAA men’s basketball probations on the quantity and quality of student applications and enrollment. Applied Economics Letters, 26(8), 657–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2018.1489107
HendricksW.DeBrockL.KoenkerR. (2003). Uncertainty, hiring, and subsequent performance: The NFL draft. Journal of Labor Economics, 21(4), 857–886. https://doi.org/10.1086/377025
20.
HortonD.DavisJ. L.Jr. (2017). The rise and fall of Mustang Mania at Southern Methodist University. In HarperS. L.DonnerJ. K. (Eds.), Scandals in college sports (pp. 13–22). Taylor & Francis.
21.
HumphreysB. R.MondelloM. (2007). Intercollegiate athletic success and donations at NCAA Division I institutions. Journal of Sport Management, 21(2), 265–280. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.21.2.265
IslamM. Q. (2019). Local development effect of sports facilities and sports teams: Case studies using synthetic control method. Journal of Sports Economics, 20(2), 242–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002517731874
24.
JohnsonC.McCannonB. (2019). The impact of the Penn State football scandal on student quality [SSRN Working Paper]. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3502550
25.
KitchensC. T. (2015). Are winners promoted too often.Evidence from the NFL draft 1999–2012?Economic Inquiry, 53(2), 1317–1330. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12165
26.
LawsonR.GrierK.AbsherS. (2019). You say you want a (rose) revolution? The effects of Georgia’s 2004 market reforms. Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, 27(1), 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecot.12205
MixonF.TrevinoL.MintoT. (2004). Touchdowns and test scores: Exploring the relationship between athletics and academics. Applied Economics Letters, 11(7), 421–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350485042000201906
PopeD. G.PopeJ. C. (2009). The impact of college sports success on the quantity and quality of student applications. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 750–780. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27751414
31.
RooneyP.SmithJ. (2019). The impact of highly publicized campus scandals on college outcomes. Contemporary Economic Policy, 37(3), 492–508. https://doi.org/10.1111/coep.12427
StinsonJ. L.HowardD. R. (2007). Athletic success and private giving to athletic and academic programs at NCAA institutions. Journal of Sport Management, 21(2), 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1123/JSM.21.2.235
36.
StinsonJ. L.HowardD. R. (2008). Winning does matter: Patterns in private giving to athletic and academic programs at NCAA division I-AA and I-AAA institutions. Sports Management Review, 11(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1441-3523(08)70101-3
37.
WalkerA. (2015). Division I intercollegiate athletics success and the financial impact on universities. SAGE Open, 5(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015611186
