Blog Brief:
- The “Flutie Effect” refers to the significant increase in college applications experienced by Boston College following Doug Flutie’s iconic “Hail Mary” pass in November 1984.
- Investing in sports can attract students but might make non-athletes feel left out and overlook other enrollment challenges.
- Colleges should focus on meeting the needs of non-athletes and attracting male students without relying solely on athletics. This is a strategic priority and requires an examination of the value equation.
- Colleges should adopt a comprehensive strategy that goes beyond athletics, focusing on adding value for all students and creating a differentiated campus environment rooted in the institution’s mission and values.
Full Blog:
In November 1984, Boston College quarterback Doug Flutie launched a desperate 60-yard “Hail Mary” pass improbably into the arms of his teammate as the final seconds ticked off the clock to defeat the defending national champion Miami Hurricanes. In the two years that followed, Boston College experienced a staggering 30% increase in applications – a phenomenon that researchers dubbed the “Flutie Effect.”
For small colleges and universities facing enrollment challenges, the Flutie Effect represents an alluring yet perilous strategy – using investment in athletic programs as a “Hail Mary” enrollment driver. Beyond the thrill of victory on the field, adding sports programs like football can attract prospective students, particularly males, to campus. For example, adding football may yield over a hundred more male students. Yet, it’s not just about football; institutions have expanded into diverse sports such as esports, bowling, bass fishing, and even varsity cornhole and synchronized skating.
An excessive focus on athletics as an enrollment strategy, however, fundamentally ignores the students who are being left behind. Higher education talks a lot about the demographic cliff, but little has been done to shrink the growing demand chasm where 1.2 million fewer students are attending undergraduate colleges than in 2011 – a million of whom are men. For colleges where 70% or 80% of the population is on sports teams, non-athlete students are starting to feel less welcome.
In this, there is an opportunity. Your institution can focus on meeting the needs of non-athletes and especially attracting men without jerseys. This should be a strategic priority on your campus. Understanding this opportunity requires a careful examination of the value equation (value equals the student’s perception of benefits divided by the cost to the student). How are you built to meet these students’ needs? In what ways do you need to change your offerings, processes, and messaging? Can you, and do you, even talk about this opportunity on your campus?
While athletics offer benefits in student life and community engagement, there are costs to consider. The arms race of college athletics can lead to substantial financial investments. Winning comes at a price as institutions navigate the pressures to compete at all costs. According to 2021-22 Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) data, across all athletic classifications, the top 20 teams in the Learfield Cup standings (which measures overall competitive performance) spend twice as much as the rest. Nearly 50% of Christian colleges with athletics compete in the NAIA, and the top 20 teams in that classification spend an average of $9.9 million on athletics. In NCAA Division III, the only non-scholarship-granting NCAA classification, the top 20 institutions spend $6.9 million. The rest of Division III spends $3 million on average.
In the face of escalating athletic expenses and shrinking margins, colleges must adopt a differentiated position and focus on a more comprehensive institutional strategy. Athletics can be part of this strategy, but it should not be the sole focus. Instead, colleges should strive to add value for all students, including those men without jerseys. Otherwise, growth for growth’s sake in athletics just becomes a Hail Mary, which statistically is very unlikely to be effective over the long haul.
–Ryan J. Dougherty is the Principal Partner at TG Three with over 20 years of experience building successful leaders, teams, and strategies. TG Three is a strategy company exclusively serving Christian institutions to help get them from where they are to where they want to be.
Recent Comments