Does Stanford provide an example?

[leopold]

So everyone knows Stanford is cutting a number of sports. Ostensibly, they are doing this under the Covid virus epidemic, but it's worth noting that they had projected to lose as much as $70M in the upcoming years even before this thing hit:

"Muir, in a Zoom call with reporters later on Wednesday, said dipping into the endowment was not an option because it is reserved for nonathletic scholarships and faculty research. Supporting 36 sports was not sustainable — pandemic or not. But the budget shortfalls, which were projected to exceed $12 million for the 2021 fiscal year even before the pandemic, would be considerably worse if football is not played this fall, as appears increasingly likely."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/spor ... -cuts.html

Are they being smart enough to drop the dead weight of certain sports permanently using the virus as a cover? Is this something we should be looking at? What sports would we look at?

[mustangxc]

We can only drop 1 sport and it would have to be a women's sport since we only offer 6 men's sports but I don't foresee dropping any women's sports as we need to stay in compliance with Title IX.

[ponyboy]

Are nonrev sports deficits a problem here?

[Dukie]

Are nonrev sports deficits a problem here?

Athletic department sports deficits are a problem. And nonrev sports will be first to go.

[ponyboy]

I understand the mechanics. I'm asking if they're a problem here.

[Dukie]

I understand the mechanics. I'm asking if they're a problem here.

Here at SMU? If they’re a problem at Stanford, then they’re a problem everywhere.

[ponyboy]

Seems a logical fallacy, but ok.

[Dukie]

Seems a logical fallacy, but ok.

Stanford has endowed every single athletic scholarship. They are the flagship all-sports university, dominating the Director’s Cup for 25 years. If they are struggling with $, everyone will.

[ponyboy]

Does anyone know if continuing to support non-rev sports is a problem at SMU?