Paying to Play in Small College Athletics

All signs are pointing toward a renaissance of on-field success for State U’s football, men’s basketball and hockey programs, suggesting that ticket demand will soon be on the upswing. This case study places students in a scenario in which a mid-major Division I university needs to decide whether to follow industry trends and outsource its ticket sales vertical or, alternatively, build an in-house sales department. After discussing the benefits and potential challenges to both tracks, and presenting three separate proposals - two from outsourcing firms, and one outlining the development of an in-house sales department - this case study challenges students to conduct a critical analysis of State U’s options and form a managerial recommendation.

Following the NCAA’s ruling to allow college athletes to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness (NIL), the marketing team at LEARFIELD, a premier multi-media rights partner for intercollegiate athletics, is hard at work to expand its leadership in (NIL) initiatives to best serve school and brand partners. The company has witnessed drastic changes in college athletics in the past five years and closely monitors the changes in student-athlete compensation as college athletes began earning money for their name, image, and likeness. LEARFIELD’s college business partners still retain control of their brand assets but now student athletes are free to engage in many activities that were once prohibited and on their own terms. While this has created a new frontier for young athletes, schools and businesses must consider how best to coordinate schools, brands, and student-athletes in a way that benefits all parties. The company must ensure that its services are holistic and consider all partners as it serves a variety of stakeholders: universities, conferences, brands, student-athletes, and the collegiate sports industry. Student-athlete NIL creates a new opportunity/division for LEARFIELD.

The landscape of college athletics is forever changing, and in July 2016 the Big 12 conference announced its intentions to explore a new round of expansion. The smallest of the 'Power Five' conferences in NCAA D1 FBS, the Big 12's quest for football competitiveness and the need for a conference championship game drive a complex and layered analysis of the best path forward. With consideration of the Big 12's national media rights, revenue sharing agreements, brand-building/recruiting opportunities, and structural dynamics, this case allows students to conduct both an internal and external analysis of the Conference's decision making process while weighing a myriad of stakeholder priorities.