Why HBCU ‘money games’ remain a complicated choice for athletic programs
TheGrio...
OPINION: As programs navigate financial challenges, leaders and alumni debate whether big payouts outweigh the risks of lopsided matchups.
Editor’s note: The following article is an op-ed, and the views expressed are the author’s own. Read more opinions on theGrio.
This weekend, Howard Bison will face Rutgers Scarlet Knights. As a proud Bison, I hope my alma mater wins, but it’s unlikely. And while the outcome isn’t guaranteed, the money from the games is. These matchups aren’t about winning but about the revenue they bring to smaller HBCU athletic departments. That’s why they’re called “money games.”
Howard will make around $475,000 in one afternoon. But those numbers do little to assuage the negative feelings when watching the game. Many agree with me, that these matchups can feel exploitative and unethical. And when the cameras zoom out to the fans, there’s an added racial element that makes you worry for the kids.
But calling money games wrong is easier than answering the question that follows: What will replace the money?
Earlier this month, Baylor beat Prairie View A&M 44 -3 with a payout of $400,000. In response to online backlash, Coach Tremaine Jackson, the head coach, pointed to the gap in fundraising and alumni giving. While many fans may show up for classics and homecoming, that enthusiasm has not translated into the financial support needed to compete with larger programs.
By fans, he’s talking directly to me. Well, a younger me. At Howard, I went to athletic events without paying for a ticket. And 14 years ago I traveled to New Jersey for the Howard vs Rutgers game and gawked at the price of a ticket. Instead of paying, I enjoyed the tailgate with friends. But despite my one man protest, games still require officials, security, equipment, and coaches.
Dr. Kiki Baker Barnes, now commissioner of the HBCU Athletic Conference, told me that when coaches and athletic directors introduce paid admissions, students protest and parents object. So the issue is dropped.
The refusal to pay is more than just stubbornness. It’s history that’s become culture.
A major legacy of chattel slavery is that since emancipation, Black people have had to fight for our intellect to be recognized and prioritized over our bodies. Simply put, HBCU students, founders, and alumni reject the idea of using the Black body to achieve financial success.
But investment in Black athletes belongs within that mission. They are Black students and Black athletes. They deserve an education, along with the facilities, coaching and care to pursue their sport.
HBCUs have made magic with too little for generations. The country celebrates the classroom accomplishments but neglects the athletic ones.
A growing number of HBCU leaders and athletic directors are actively opting out of “money games,” arguing that the psychological and physical toll on their athletes is no longer worth the paycheck. But when someone isn’t paying, programs close. Fisk launched the first HBCU women’s gymnastics team and drew national attention. Three years later, the university ended the program citing a lack of resources.
LSU offers a glimpse of what athletic revenue can do at a university with far greater resources. In 2012, the university announced a $36 million transfer from athletics to other parts of the university over five years for academic, research and public-service work. But my friends who attended LSU paid for student tickets on top of everything else college already cost. It was just one revenue making steam, but it reflects the need for a total reevaluation of how we see the game.
And without it, we cannot properly invest in our young people. Contrary to popular belief, talented Black athletes are interested in HBCUs. Angel Reese shared that she had wanted to attend Howard. But LSU had the facilities to make her a national star, so that’s where she went.
Luckily, there are movements in the right direction.
Recently, athletic programs at HBCUs have garnered new eyes and new accomplishments, driven by a string of high-profile coaches like former NFL star Michael Vick at Norfolk State University. Howard University Women’s Swimming and Diving Team captured a historic Northeast Conference championship. This cross-sport dominance is commanding the heightened national television slots, corporate sponsorships, and prime revenue that these elite athletes completely deserve.
FAMU’s agreement with Nike covers all 14 of its sports programs and the Marching 100, and includes student development opportunities. Grambling State has also reported a multimedia partnership with Urban Edge Network, alongside upgrades to its softball and soccer facilities. These are examples to build on, not substitutes for a lasting funding plan.
I am not asking HBCU students to shoulder another bill so their schools can imitate LSU. I am asking alumni, fans, corporations and major donors to recognize that athletics support our institution’s missions. But if we want another alternative, we should give our athletic directors and their athletes more choices.
Because without a real plan, money games may not just the best option, it may be the only one.
Julienne Louis-Anderson is a Howard and Xavier University of Louisiana alumna who writes about the intersection of culture and politics with education and human development. You can find her on all social media platforms @juliennelouisanderson.