"Ivies have zero investment in their student athletes. No athletic money and most SA are “paying the freight” to attend. Unfortunately for the SA attending the ivies the schools have no incentive to play. In fact...... they are saving money and adding to their multi billion dollar endowments"
If money is truly the reason for cutting athletic teams Brown and Cornell could head in that direction. Apparently, Cornell had an operating deficit of $104,236,000 for 2019. Brown appears to have had a $25,362,000 deficit for 2019. Dartmouth had a surplus of $32,607.000 and they are cutting teams. The rest of the IVY's seem to be doing OK. The remaining 5 schools all had operating surpluses of $200,000,000 or more...
Penn - $519,173,000 Princeton - $405,536,000 Harvard - $297,900,000 Yale - $270,491,000 Columbia - $222,949,000
School Endowment Value as of 2019 Operational Surplus (Deficit) 2019
Brown University $4,200,000,000 ($25,362,000) Columbia University $10,950,000,000 $222,949,000 Cornell University $7,300,000,000 ($104,236,000) Dartmouth College $5,700,000,000 $32,607,000 Harvard University $40,900,000,000 $297,900,000 University of Pennsylvania $14,700,000,000 $519,173,000 Princeton University $26,100,000,000 $405,536,000 Yale University $30,300,000,000 $270,491,000
Sources: Department of Education, Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, Yale University
Great stats. But did you read the statement. Ivies do not have an investment in student athletes. Most SA pay to go to an ivy. The above statement may be true. Ivy schools might rather give aid to a need based slot than a SA. It’s no secret the SA’s are not backed by the schools as a whole.
Does Stanford not back their Student Athletes? Stanford has been considered one of if not the best college athletic program for many years and they just cut 11 Varsity sports. BTW, Stanford has the third largest endowment of any University ($27,700,000 approx)
Sounds like you have an ax to grind for some reason.
The Stanford Cut was for non financial reasons
"the “optics” of “country-club staples” such as squash and golf help explain why these sports got slashed. “At a time when racial justice and diversity have become a more open national conversation,” Korn wrote, “the sports being eliminated are the ones that tend to draw overwhelmingly white, often wealthy players.”
Dartmouth cuts were to redirect admission slots to individuals from certain socioeconomic backgrounds which differ from the athletes from the teams being eliminated.
Reply
Quote
