Long Beach State Sports : Re: From the D-1 Tracker

At current funding levels our athletic programs cannot sustain a $2.6 million hit annually. Throw in the massive cost to fix the Pyramid or open a new arena, and I can't see any way out of this that keeps LB viable in Division I short a $5 million a year in guaranteed new revenue (ain't happening). I'll enjoy however long we have at the current level, with no expectations of sustaining it for too long. I'm fine with that, like others have expressed, pro sports are losing my interest, now college sports, what next, high school NIL lawsuits?

Always a 49er who will only identify with Prospector Pete for a mascot. Go Beach!

Previous Message

What a mess. This is the work of the P4 conferences.
Here is a section from the article I posted below that details the funding problems for the mid-majors.

"The big schools, the schools with athletic budgets like USC’s ($212 million in 2022-23, according to the most recent Equity in Athletics Data Analysis figures) or Michigan’s ($202.5 million) can better absorb the cost. But the schools with far less room for error – the vast majority of the 269 – will feel it like a gut punch.

That annual loss of revenue for the next decade will be particularly felt at UCR (a $15.792 million ’22-23 budget, according to the EADA figures) and fellow Big West programs Cal State Northridge ($19.8 million), Cal State Fullerton ($21.899 million), Long Beach State ($26.4 million) and UC Irvine ($25.2 million). And it will be felt just as significantly at Pepperdine ($28 million) and Loyola Marymount ($35 million) of the West Coast Conference and California Baptist ($32.7 million) of the WAC.

Previous Message

The Athletic’s Jim Trotter observes that “seemingly little attention” has been paid to how the House settlement will impact “mid-majors or lower-level DI schools, which some administrators and executives believe could be left with three choices when addressing the loss of revenue stemming from the $2.8B settlement: 1) find a way to replace the monies; 2) make cuts to programs to offset lost monies; or 3) drop down a division. The latter is already being discussed among some athletic directors who are fearful of what the new world order could bring, according to a small-school AD who has been privy to private conversations.” One “small-conference” commissioner tells Trotter: “There’s a major financial difference in operating a Big West Conference or West Coast Conference athletic department versus a high-level Division II department. The differences are in scholarships, scholarship equivalencies, what you’re paying your coaches, facility costs, administrative costs. There’s a massive difference. So, if you’re going to try to stay put in DI and have a go at it, where do you make up for the loss in revenue? People are tapped out. Donors? They’re fatigued, but you’re going to have to go back to them anyway.” The bigger existential threat, however, is the Johnson v. NCAA case, according to the commissioner, who contends that if student-athletes are able to unionize collectively bargain, “you’re going to see a lot of non-Power 5 athletic departments go away, including at the Division I level.” (link)