Last Updated on January 19, 2012
Over the next few days, BusinessofCollegeSports.com will investigate how much schools spend on recruiting.
Today, recruitment expense data from the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12 and Conference USA will be posted. Tomorrow, data for the MAC, Pac-12, SEC, Sun Belt, Mountain West and WAC will be posted. On Monday, a spreadsheet listing the top-50 spenders in terms of recruiting will be listed, sorted by total recruitment expense budget, amount spent per team on average and amount spent per player on average.
The data was obtained from the Department of Education. Although this data is not perfect, it is the only data available for both public and private institutions. Furthermore, the data provided is for the 2010-11 school year.
|School||Men’s Sports Recruitment Expenses||Average Per Team||Average Per Athlete|
|School||Women’s Sports Recruitment Expenses||Average Per Team||Average Per Athlete|
In 2010-11, the Big 12 school with the biggest overall recruitment budget for men’s sports was Kansas. Kansas spent $1,033,618.00 in recruiting student-athletes for its men’s teams in 2010-11. Kansas also spent the most, on average, in recruiting for its men’s teams in 2010-11 and the most per each male student-athlete. However, the amount spent to actually recruit individual athletes would be higher than listed in the spreadsheet, as the average calculated took into consideration every male athlete at Kansas, and not solely incoming student-athletes (thus, it took into consideration juniors and seniors in men’s sports programs). The Department of Education does not report how many student-athletes a school recruited in a given year, but rather, provides a lump-sum number of the amount of student-athletes on campus.
The Big 12 school which spent the most on recruiting female student-athletes in 2010-11, was Texas. Texas spent $481,019.00 in recruitment expenses for its women’s sports teams. Subsequently, Texas had the highest average spent in recruiting per team and per student-athlete.
Leave a Reply
- Colorado Football Sells More Than 30,000 Tickets For Its 2023 Spring Game
- How Can International Athletes Get NIL Deals? Here’s How to Do It Safely
- Degree Partners With Giannis Antetokounmpo for Walk-On NIL Deals
- Automating NIL Operations for Collectives and Universities
- NIL Educational Seminar Unveiled for #NACDA23
January 19, 2012 at 12:56 pm
“…the average calculated took into consideration every male athlete at Kansas, and not solely incoming student-athletes.” These figures are interesting, but makes conclusions elusive. A basketball dominant school like Kansas might be spending a disproportionate amount on that part of the program compared to other schools, which would skew their average. We can’t know why Georgia Tech led the ACC for the same lack of explanation. Given recruiting is predominantly for incoming talent, describing them as such is almost a misnomer. Not your job to breakdown these curiosities, but these numbers represent more data than information.
January 19, 2012 at 1:40 pm
Good catch, Jeff. I always try to explain how I calculate things and where the data is coming from. In the coming weeks, I will be working with the universities to try to figure out just how much they spend on every incoming athlete. My hunch with Georgia Tech is that a bulk of it goes towards recruiting football players. Football arguably has to recruit the greatest number of players each year, since it’s typically the largest team in terms of participants.
Pingback: ISU recruiting budget 4th highest in B12 - CycloneFanatic
Pingback: Daily Bullets | Pistols Firing
January 20, 2012 at 12:15 pm
I agree football is the likeliest explanation since it has the biggest roster. It would be revealing to see the difference between the cost of recruiting a quarterback and a middle front for the ladies volleyball team, though that level of detail is probably unavailable.. If you have the opportunity, please explain the role Title IX plays in recruiting expenses at some point.
May 21, 2012 at 2:58 am
like YouTube provide a space to host rmucriteent videos that showcase your company culture, while Facebook makes it easy to build your employment brand through photos, video and real-time conversation with