All Hokie, All the Time. Period. Presented by

Conference Realignment Board

VTHokie2000

Joined: 01/01/2005 Posts: 33818
Likes: 12458


Ummm.they can do both.


For example, Michigan charges the following prices for softball;

$10 Chairback
$8 Reserved Bleacher
$6 General Admission Outfield Bleacher
$3 G/A Outfield Bleacher Group (10 or more)

Michigan even sells season tickets for softball. Whereas VT charges $0 for softball and doesn't sell season tickets. Michigan makes money off softball and VT doesn't make money off softball.

My point is that if you go through every non-revenue sport currently sanctioned by the NCAA, then in most cases you will find that some schools will make money off them and some schools won't make money off them. I don't think you will even find a consistent dividing line. For example Michigan currently sponsors 31 sports, but only sells tickets to 14 sports.
[Post edited by VTHokie2000 at 03/02/2016 3:59PM]

(In response to this post by chuckd4vt)

Link: Michigan Athletics


Posted: 03/02/2016 at 3:59PM



+0

Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:


Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:


Current Thread:
 
  
What is the next step? -- Guy LeDouche 03/01/2016 11:46AM
  IF the break the Men's BBall Tourny goes too -- BigCrumpy 03/04/2016 1:59PM
  P4 is next step -- nebraskafaninwi 03/01/2016 7:11PM
  You can't lump all the non-revenue sports into 1 basket -- VTHokie2000 03/02/2016 3:24PM
  I do agree there should be mandate at some level -- VTHokie2000 03/01/2016 2:43PM

Tech Sideline is Presented By:

Our Sponsors

vm307