Football Programs and University Budget Decisions
This paper examines the role of football programs within university settings, analyzing both the quantitative and qualitative factors that institutional decision-makers must consider. It discusses how athletic programs contribute to student pride, recruitment marketing, and revenue generation, while also acknowledging the financial obligations that compete for limited university resources. The paper recommends the use of discounted cash flow analysis to evaluate competing budget priorities, while also emphasizing that intangible community benefits — such as school spirit, community engagement, and student morale — cannot be captured by financial metrics alone. Ultimately, the paper argues that committees must balance short-term costs against long-term qualitative value.
- The Role of Athletic Programs in University Life: How athletics drive pride, recruitment, and revenue
- Competing Financial Obligations and Budget Priorities: Using DCF analysis to evaluate university budget tradeoffs
- Balancing Quantitative and Qualitative Factors: Community and morale benefits that resist financial measurement
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper structures its argument in a logical three-part progression: benefits, costs, and the integration of qualitative factors — making it easy to follow.
- It correctly identifies discounted cash flow analysis as the appropriate quantitative tool for comparing competing university investments, demonstrating applied financial reasoning.
- The paper acknowledges the limits of quantitative analysis and explicitly argues for weighing intangible community and morale benefits, reflecting nuanced decision-making thinking.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates a cost-benefit framework applied to institutional decision-making, distinguishing between measurable financial returns and unquantifiable social value. This technique — explicitly naming the analytical tool (DCF analysis) and then identifying where it falls short — is a strong model for applied business and higher-education policy writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper consists of three paragraphs, each functioning as a distinct argumentative section: (1) the general value of athletic programs to universities; (2) the specific financial tradeoffs a university committee must evaluate; and (3) the qualitative, community-level benefits that resist quantification. The conclusion is embedded in the final paragraph rather than set apart as a separate section.
The Role of Athletic Programs in University Life
In many universities, athletic programs have a profound impact on the overall student experience. Athletic programs instill a sense of pride and accomplishment across the student population. Particularly when a team is winning, students tend to feel better about their school and their affiliation with it. In addition, athletic programs are often seen as marketing tools used to supplement the recruitment process. Although few prospective students attend college solely because of a school's athletic program, successful programs do aid in recruitment. Students are often attracted to schools that excel both athletically and academically. Most schools can perform well in the academic component, but only a handful can achieve consistent athletic success. This dual approach to recruitment provides a means for universities to differentiate themselves from their peers. Finally, athletic programs — particularly football — provide revenue streams to the university. Although very few university athletic programs are profitable, many do generate revenue that can support the overall athletic program in its entirety.
Competing Financial Obligations and Budget Priorities
In the instance of a university weighing this decision, the committee must weigh the benefits listed above against the many costs associated with maintaining a football team. This is particularly important when the university faces mounting obligations to both faculty and the institution as a whole. Benefits for tenured professors, scholarship awards to attract strong students, renovations to aging facilities, and marketing expenses all compete within university budgets — and many of these priorities are critical to the long-term success of the institution.
In order to make a rational decision, the committee should use discounted cash flow analysis to determine the present value of the future cash streams associated with these competing projects. Through discounted cash flow analysis, the committee can better determine which projects to prioritize and which to forego. This approach allows the committee to make the most informed decision regarding resource allocation and the resulting return on investment.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.