Volleyball is In The Black

Mavric

Mavric

Yoda
Staff member
Boasting three national titles, 11 Final Four appearances and the sport’s biggest crowds, the University of Nebraska-
Lincoln undoubtedly ranks as a 
college volleyball powerhouse.


Now those hard-hitting Cornhuskers have emerged within the athletic department as a financial force as well.

Thanks to a big spike in revenue from the team’s move into a new 7,900-seat home arena, the Husker volleyball team netted a profit of nearly $600,000 during the past budget year, according to reports the school recently filed with the NCAA and the federal government.

Not only did it mark the first time Big Red volleyball finished in the black, but that profit figure also appears unmatched by any program in the country. In fact, experts in college athletics finance say it’s extremely rare for any women’s sports program — or any sport outside football and men’s basketball — to be a net revenue-raiser for a school.
Click to expand...
OWH

54bb3d04b5e5f.image.jpg


In the black: Rare air for NU volleyball

At most large schools, football and men’s basketball are the only athletic programs that generate revenue. Not so at Nebraska, where volleyball finished in the black by more than a half million dollars in 2013-14.

Football: $36,316,663
Basketball (m): $2,116,412
Volleyball : $577,601
Sand volleyball (w): -$105,669
Rifle (w): -$345,808
Golf (w): -$495,658
Bowling (w): -$501,325
Golf (m): -$503,528
Tennis (m): -$613,479
Tennis (w): -$647,377
Gymnastics (m): -$681,803
Baseball : -$719,993
Wrestling : -$1,094,543
Swimming (w): -$1,107,364
Gymnastics (w): -$1,148,102
Soccer (w): -$1,239,849
Softball : -$1,377,970
Track/cross country (m): -$1,577,981
Track/cross country (w): -$1,688,689
Basketball (w): -$2,509,607

Source: University of Nebraska report to NCAA
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackshirt316 said:
2 questions I don't get.

Why is tennis so expensive?

Why does softball cost nearly double baseball?
Click to expand...
Tennis probably explained thanks to next to zero revenue.

Similar for softball, baseball brings in a lot more money than softball through ticket sales and such.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackshirt316 said:
2 questions I don't get.

Why is tennis so expensive?

Why does softball cost nearly double baseball?
Click to expand...
Softball and baseball probably both cost about the same with similar expenses for travelling, scholarships, and equipment. The problem is people probably don't buy softball tickets and softball games are rarely televised.

The tennis team has 11 athletes. Let's pretend 8 are on scholarship. That's probably $120,000 a year. They have 15 away competitions this year. You're probably sending 10 people to those if you include coach(es) and a team manager. All food costs, tutoring costs, anything athletes get is probably divided by the total # athletes and that's added on to the expense for that sport.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, singling out the men's sports on this list, and you can see why some schools have chosen to drop baseball or wrestling. Title IX protects the women's sports for the most part, or so I have been told. Also football can lose a school a ton of money if they have no fan support. Look at UNO.

 
IA State Husker said:
Wow, singling out the men's sports on this list, and you can see why some schools have chosen to drop baseball or wrestling. Title IX protects the women's sports for the most part, or so I have been told. Also football can lose a school a ton of money if they have no fan support. Look at UNO.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much exactly what Title IX does. It guarantees that schools don't sacrifice women's athletics in favor of men's athletics.

This country is weird. We focus SO MUCH on male-dominated sports and nearly entirely ignore female sports. Women's basketball is often (but not always) a more technical sport, more cerebral, because women often simply can't overpower their opponent & dunk the ball. Women's volleyball tends to feature longer rallies than men's volleyball because women can't (often) just muscle the ball to the floor. Ever watched men's volleyball? On a collegiate/professional level it's boring as hell. Serve, pass, set, BOOM! huge kill/block, repeat. The skill it takes to play the game gets lost in the process of huge kills. Women's volleyball features far fewer huge kills - although they're still present - because they lack the muscle men have. That lends itself to a much more strategic game, longer rallies, overall a better product for the viewer. It's why we have a Home Run derby once a year and play 162 games of actual baseball instead of the other way 'round. Watching a home run derby six days a week would get pretty boring, pretty quickly.

Weird thing is, Americans don't tend to support the more cerebral games. Football, sure, which is technical as hell the more you dig into it, but most fans just watch for the long pass, the big hit, the great run. It's like watching NASCAR for the crashes. There are professional women's volleyball leagues all over the world. They've tried to start them in America, but Americans can't be bothered to buy tickets. We're too busy with football & baseball.

Think about this. How many people in Nebraska know who Tommie Frazier is? Just about everyone, right? How many people know who Christie Johnson is? A fraction of that, but she was every bit as important to Nebraska's first-ever National Championship in Volleyball (1995) as Frazier was to football. CJ was money, artfully ran an offense featuring some of our most legendary players, was a beast at the net (won like 99% of the jousts she was in) and has turned into an excellent coach at Iowa State - making that program a contender after being a doormat its entire existence. I'd guess CJ is on the short list to replace Cook when he retires (hopefully not for a long time). But she gets next to no recognition because she plays a "girl's" sport.

Anyway. End of rambling. Let's just say I'm in favor of Title IX. It's way better for America than America knows.

 
IA State Husker said:
I agree. Hope you didn't misconstrue my comments as anti-IX.
Click to expand...
Not at all. That's a long-standing rant of mine. Not directed at you at all.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top