To gamble on the Flutie Effect is a short-term fix: FBS athletic spending and undergraduate enrollment

I received an inquiry from a reporter in Houston to look at the impact of athletics and academic expenses on institutional enrollment.?This can also be referred to as part of the “Flutie Effect”, a theory posed which notes that athletic success leads to an increase in enrollment. Doug Flutie, as you may recall, tossed a Hail Mary in 1984 to help Boston College beat defending national champion University of Miami on national television on a Thanksgiving week.?The next year, enrollment jumped up 11%, encouraging the thought that it was Flutie’s efforts that led to an increase in enrollment.?Here are just a few articles and dissertations on the Flutie Effect (google "Flutie Effect" for more): NBC, Forbes, Dissertations at St Johns, App State, Louisville.

The idea for this article is the more an institution spends in athletics is accomplished primarily for prestige, in large part to pay for the success of an athletics team, specifically football and men’s basketball (see previous articles on the Resource/Revenue Allocation Theory, where the more money made funds the part of an organization that makes the most money).?Believers in the Flutie Effect point to Gonzaga’s permanence in the March Madness tournament for 24 straight seasons and Appalachian State’s historic win in football at Michigan in 2007 and at multiple FCS championships. However, on the other side, there has been little long-term translation into increased enrollment based on March Madness success schools like Maryland-Baltimore County defeating top-ranked Virginia in 2018, George Mason’s 2006 run to the Final Four, or Florida Gulf Coast’s tourney run in 2013. ?

Remember sports are a zero-sum game, and for every winner, there is a loser.?The difference between Gonzaga, App State and UMBC, George Mason and FGCU is sustainability. ?The Flutie Effect is only useful if an institution can sustain its success.?Most cannot, at least not at the same level.

What makes the Flutie Effect real??Would I, as an undergrad, choose a school based on its football or basketball team's success? Is that what education is all about, or should I choose the best school for my educational endeavors? It is important to understand campus culture and student involvement in the first year is critical towards a student's decision to stick around through graduation. Isn't it more than athletic team success? What are potential applicants thinking: Do I want to go to a school based on a Hail Mary, a million-dollar free throw, or a run to the Final Four??Do I want to stay close to home or getaway and explore??Does my institution of interest have a major topic of my interest??Do I like the campus??HOW MUCH DOES IT COST??Is there a discount or a grant program to reduce my cost??Is it an inclusive, multicultural environment??Is it safe? Do I like the wider off-campus community??Does the institution feel right to me??A study imploring factor analysis of enrollees should focus on each of these factors as well as athletics success and investment to better analyze the Flutie Effect, longitudinally.?

Today, let’s just make it simple and review the data from an expense standpoint, comparing athletics to academic expenses.?We can use the Knight-Newhouse College Athletics Database to learn more about this phenomenon.?

Academic expenses are also known as E&G, or “Education and General” expenses for each institution, a common measure of all the investments of an institution combined: faculty, staffing, research, infrastructure, marketing, athletics, residence halls, police, medical, etc.?E&G is everything.?Mind you, athletics is typically only 4-8% of any institution’s overall E&G.?Varsity sports are small by comparison compared to an institution’s total ledger, but athletics is by far the largest publicity engine of an institution.?As Dr. Doug Toma, a former mentor of mine, told me back in the day: athletics is the “front porch.”?Is it worth the cost for the prestige? ?

But is it all of the other academic expenses driving enrollment more than athletics??Yes, most likely. ?Time to do a data dive...

This is what Michigan State (a Big Ten, Power 5 member) looks like:

Here is what Central Michigan (a Group of 5, Mid-American Conference member) looks like:

Now, let's compare to the median of 106 public schools in the FBS (service academies not included, Pitt and Penn State aren't included because they did not share financial records longitudinally based on state law):

Here's the Power 5 conference publics median (again, sans Penn State and Pitt):

And, finally, let's look a the Group of 5 publics median:

What we can glean here is fairly clear: (1) both athletic and academic spending have been on the rise in the past 15 years, with the exception of COVID in 2021. (2) it is impossible to parse out the impact of athletics spending compared to overall E&G academic spending on enrollment: for instance in FBS in 2017, what part of the 4.2% academic investment did the 5.7% of athletics investment play in raising enrollment by 0.7%? Likely, this is different at every college, or at least in part in each state university system. (3) Both Michigan State, and especially Central Michigan, defy any probability of the impact of athletics investment in enrollment. Bottom line, there is a lack of consistency from investment in athletics and a resulting increase in enrollment.? This would be the case, even if you used a one-year lag, as an investment in one year can possibly impact athletic performance in that same year, but more likely enrollment in the following year. ?

If you read all the articles, you come to the conclusion as found with Oregon's football success in the 2000's: "You can't have the Flutie Effect happen over and over again" (link), and “In short, the link between athletic success at the Division I level and academic outcomes is empirically tenuous at best and at worst may be an expensive Faustian bargain for the DI schools that pursue it, despite the Ducks’ fondest hopes.” (link).

I love studying the Flutie Effect, because it makes us think about the tie between finances, athletics, marketing, and educational attainment. But, to date, making decisions to invest in athletics and gamble on the Flutie Effect to raise enrollment is like... well, throwing a Hail Mary.