Study Finds College Football Does Not Increase Academic Donations
A study at the University of Arkansas, looking at 29 FBS programs from 2000-09, claims a positive correlation between college football success and alumni donations exists, but only for athletics. It found a negative correlation between football wins and academic donations.
According to the study so far, for every additional 1.5 wins in football, the athletic donations increased by about $6.7 million. At the same time, though, academic donations decreased by about $16.4 million. The opposite was true for academic donations when using non-athletic variables such as personal income and school academic ranking.
The study plans to look at all 120 FBS programs. It’s hard to evaluate it without knowing which teams were studied, which with a small sample size could vary the data greatly. Viewing the issue generally, here is a breakdown of the top 25 university endowments by football prowess.
FBS Elite (AQ): Texas (3), Michigan (7), Texas A&M (10), Notre Dame (14), USC (21)
FBS (AQ): Stanford (5), Northwestern (9), Cal (13), Duke (15), Virginia (19), Vanderbilt (22)
FBS (Non-AQ): Rice (20)
No FBS Football: Harvard (1), Yale (2), Princeton (4), MIT (6), Columbia (8), Penn (11), Chicago (12), Wash in SL (17), Cornell (18), Dartmouth (23), Johns Hopkins (25)
No Football: Emory (16), NYU (24)
The endowments at Texas, Michigan, Texas A&M, Notre Dame and USC suggest football stature and academic stature can coincide. The interesting question is whether football success contributes to academic success. The aforementioned schools would argue football gives them exposure and forms a more lasting bond with students that drives donations, though looking at the list you could make the complete opposite assessment.
Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Penn and the University of Chicago comprise six of the top 12 university endowments. What’s interesting is that those schools actively withdrew from elite college football. While their compatriots hopped on the gravy train with athletic scholarships and mass revenues, the Ivies retreated. The University of Chicago won seven Big Ten titles and featured the first Heisman trophy winner Jay Berwanger before dropping football in 1939 and 1946. Those schools seem to be doing pretty well on the donation front despite not having football.
We would suspect the true answer is that college football has neither positive nor negative correlation to academic donations. It’s irrelevant. The common factor for all those schools is that they provide great educations. Great educations lead to high-paying jobs. Wealthy alumni are more likely to make large donations.
[Photo via Getty]

- LSU Offers Scholarship to Snoop Dogg Snoop Lion’s Son Cordell Broadus
- Miguel Cabrera Hit a Home Run With a Huge Assist From Michael Bourn [Video]
- Donovan McNabb in Advanced Talks with Fox Sports 1 to Possibly Join Their Version of Sportscenter
- Houston Astros Vendor Caught on the Toilet with Snow Cones Next to Him, Has Been Fired [Video]
- Baltimore Orioles Wearing Canadian Tuxedos (All-Denim) For Their Trip to Toronto

- Nada on LSU Offers Scholarship to
Snoop DoggSnoop Lion's Son Cordell Broadus - Nada on LSU Offers Scholarship to
Snoop DoggSnoop Lion's Son Cordell Broadus - hussler2 on Donovan McNabb in Advanced Talks with Fox Sports 1 to Possibly Join Their Version of Sportscenter
- scripty on LSU Offers Scholarship to
Snoop DoggSnoop Lion's Son Cordell Broadus - T.E. on LSU Offers Scholarship to
Snoop DoggSnoop Lion's Son Cordell Broadus
18 Responses to “Study Finds College Football Does Not Increase Academic Donations”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.






May 4th, 2012 at 6:21 PM
On what possible scale is Aggie football considered “elite”? That’s a fucking joke of a scale.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:22 PM
well there’s your problem right there.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:24 PM
Revenue and fan interest.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:24 PM
On what possible scale is Aggie football considered “elite”? That’s a fucking joke of a scale.
Agree with this. Last I checked they haven’t been elite since R.C. Slocum was the coach.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:25 PM
The scale is obviously debatable, but my basic metric was “this school makes a lot of revenue from football.”
May 4th, 2012 at 6:26 PM
rc slocum sounds like he should have his own travelling circus.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:27 PM
a UTI study finds college football increases fun donations.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:28 PM
The scale is obviously debatable, but my basic metric was “this school makes a lot of revenue from football.”
Certainly I’ll agree by the scale you mentioned in 3 that they are at or near elite level. But in terms of product on the field…not as much.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:29 PM
“Last I checked they haven’t been elite since R.C. Slocum was the coach.”
If occasionally playing after New Year’s Day and losing every time is elite, then I guess that’s right. I don’t think they’ve been elite since about 1940.
But Duffy’s explanation clears up the fact that it was based on attendance and revenue, something a big state school like Aggie will never lack.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:30 PM
frankly, im kind of surprised aggie’s endowment was that highly ranked. i know there’s a lot of money running through there, but top 10 was a little shocking.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:30 PM
rc slocum sounds like he should have his own travelling circus.
He might. I haven’t heard anything about him in awhile.
Slocum had a pretty impressive tenure:
During his 14 years as head coach, Slocum led the Aggies to a record of 123–47–2, making him the winningest coach in Texas A&M history. During his career, Slocum never had a losing season and won four conference championships, including the Big 12 title in 1998 and two Big 12 South Championships, 97,98. Additionally, he led the Aggies to become the first school in the Southwest Conference history to post three consecutive perfect conference seasons and actually went four consecutive seasons without a conference loss. Slocum reached 100 wins faster than any other active coach. He has the best winning percentage in SWC history, one spot ahead of the legendary coach Darrell Royal who is number 2. Slocum helped make A&M’s Kyle Field become one of the hardest places for opponents to play, losing only 12 games at home in 14 years. For over a year, A&M held the longest home-winning streak in the nation, losing in 1989 and not again until late in 1995. In the 1990s, A&M lost only four times at Kyle Field. Slocum was named SWC Coach of the Year three times during his tenure as head coach. His “Wrecking Crew” defense led the SWC in four statistical categories from 1991 through 1993 and led the nation in total defense in 1991.
Over 50 Texas A&M players were drafted into the NFL during Slocum’s career as head coach.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:31 PM
frankly, im kind of surprised aggie’s endowment was that highly ranked. i know there’s a lot of money running through there, but top 10 was a little shocking.
Huge alumni network. Plus they probably count the endowments from the other individual schools in the Texas A&M system.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:32 PM
fuckin’ dat NVAguyen.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:35 PM
Dat Nguyen, as far as I know, remains the sole answer to any trivia question that starts with “This Vietnamese football player….”
May 4th, 2012 at 6:37 PM
a UTI study finds college football increases fun donations. Spencer
Why does an uterine tract infection study determine this?
Huge alumni network. Plus they probably count the endowments from the other individual schools in the Texas A&M system.
I shit on aTm (Ass To Mouth… I saw that earlier, MS) all the time. But, I can’t deny they are huge on this angle. One day, they might field a decent football team.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:39 PM
I shit on aTm (Ass To Mouth… I saw that earlier, MS)
/tips hat
May 4th, 2012 at 6:56 PM
True. But Princeton, Harvard and Yale also were the Texas, Alabama and Michigan back in the first 40-60 years of college football. There was definitely a correlation between being good at football and being considered a smart elite school back then, Harvard, Princeton and Yale just decided to scale it down once they realized they couldn’t compete with the new powers.
All three of those schools have football stadiums of 57,000 (Harvard), 64,000 (Yale) and 42,000 (Princeton’s old stadium), they didn’t hold chemistry competitions in them and considering all three were built in the early 1900s, that size was huge. Penn’s stadium used to hold 78,000 back in 1920.
/Also this site needs more college lacrosse coverage. Go Hopkins.
May 4th, 2012 at 7:20 PM
wonder how emory got on that list
/
no i dont