Collegiate Times

Virginia Tech football lost more than just the Orange Bowl this January.

The athletic department took a financial sack of more than $400,000 simply by participating in the game. While the Hokies pulled in $1.7 million in revenue, their expenses exceeded $2.1 million, producing a net loss of nearly half a million dollars, a stunning result considering the $17.5 million payout that was spread across ACC member schools.

Anyone who watched the game will point to the obvious contrast between Sun Life Stadium that night in Miami with other venues such as the Rose Bowl Game on New Year’s Day; while the Rose Bowl was packed with fans, Sun Life Stadium was relatively empty when Stanford demolished Tech en route to a 42-10 victory.

That is partly due to timing — the Rose Bowl fell on its traditional Jan. 1 date, while Tech was forced to play the following Monday, when many people were returning to work following the holiday travel season. But while ticket sales were a factor in producing the whopping loss, they only account for 10 percent of the total amount.

Others will point to the structure of the contract Tech signed to play in the game, which set strict requirements for where and how long players and other university affiliates could stay. This keeps teams from bringing down lodging costs since they can’t shop around for lower rates.

While teams face adverse situations with these contracts — after witnessing the half-empty stadium, the financial loss is not surprising — they lack the power to alter the terms to allow for making a profit by participating.

Because of the large difference in the bargaining power of bowl committees versus individual teams, athletic conferences and the NCAA need to play a larger role in negotiations to help prevent circumstances such as Tech’s. It is unfair to Tech and those who will carry this loss — patrons of the athletic program — that the organizing committee can dictate terms (and thereby, financial results) that in any other business scenario would lead the other party to laugh its way out of the room.

If conferences and the NCAA itself cannot help bargain for a more equitable contract, teams should seriously consider boycotting BCS bowls. Currently this would result in large amounts of negativity directed toward the program rejecting the offer, however decisions made collectively — at the NCAA level — should more adequately represent the financial interests of schools.

Evidenced by ESPN’s lucrative BCS broadcasting rights, there is money to be made playing major bowl games such as the Orange Bowl. Conferences and the NCAA need to live up to their mission statements of supporting collegiate athletics and help structure more equitable bowl contracts so that losses like those incurred by Tech do not continue to hurt universities and their supporters in the future. 

Winning should not be a financial loss.

-the editorial board is composed of peter velz, scott masselli and gabi seltzer

A version of this article appeared in the Mar 15 issue of the Collegiate Times.