Welcome and thank you for spending part of your day with NILnomics.

This week, I'm turning to James Madison University. The College Football Playoff sparked familiar debates about Group of Five programs—whether teams like JMU and Tulane deserved consideration, whether selection criteria favor historical reputation over current performance, and whether the system needs reform. Rather than rehash those arguments, I went looking for what makes JMU different from their G5 peers in measurable terms.

I found something. One specific metric where JMU stands well ahead of comparable programs. I'll be honest—I'm not thrilled about what the data shows, but as always, I'll let the numbers speak for themselves.

Let’s get into it.

Transparency is good - unbundle the fees!

A few weeks ago I looked at student fees across college athletics. I compared what schools reported for overall student fee revenue against their athletic-specific fees—the ones explicitly earmarked for the athletic department.

That second category deserves more attention, because it reveals a better approach.

All schools charge students a mandatory fee where, generally, a portion will find its way to the athletic department. But most schools bury that athletic funding within broader campus fees—calling it "student activities" or "campus services" or some other vague category.

James Madison does it differently. They charge a separate, clearly labeled athletic fee. Their website is straightforward: "Support of the intercollegiate athletic programs for men and women." There are some fun explanations out there - Maryland, Louisville, New Mexico, and West Virginia (which really breaks it down) do the same.

This approach is rare. Only 48 out of 137 FBS schools charge explicit athletic fees. Among Group of Five programs, just 27 unbundle their athletic funding this way.

Here's my argument: if any portion of a student fee goes to athletics, it should be an explicit athletic fee. Not bundled. Not hidden. A clear line item that says exactly how much students are paying for sports.

Why don't more schools do this? Because explicit athletic fees draw scrutiny—and sometimes student opposition. It's easier to hide $500 for athletics inside a $2,000 "comprehensive fee" than to put that $500 on its own line and defend it. But hiding the cost doesn't make it go away; it just makes it harder to debate.

When schools make these fees visible, everyone gets to participate in the conversation. Sometimes students protest the amount (North Texas, who needed it this year). Sometimes they vote to increase it (Monroe). Either way, they're making informed decisions about their own money.

JMU is one of those 27 schools being transparent. And as you'll see in a moment, they're not just unbundling their fees—they're leading the Group of Five in a way that might surprise you.The Visual

Final Point:

Are athletics specific fees the reason JMU made the CFP this year? Probably not. But it does show how the entire institution is focused on supporting athletics in a clear, transparent way. There’s something admirable in that. Also, more money doesn’t hurt.

This section is for articles, podcasts, interviews, and any other college sports related content I found interesting this week. If you have something you’d like to share, shoot me an email and it may be featured.

⚽ College Soccer - an interesting article on the internationalization that is occurring in college soccer. If it’s happening there, it will spread.

🎧 NIL Clubhouse - the guys get UNC AD Bubba Cunningham and professor Donald Bruce on the pod. If anything, it gives you a look into what the average AD is thinking these days.

🎧 Sportswise - Gabe gets famous lawyer David Boies on to talk some. of the major sports law cases he’s worked and the current Panini case.

🎧 Phantom Island - an interesting discussion about the Group of 5 and this year’s playoffs, with a great retrospective on the history that got us to today.

🎧 Higher Ed Athletics - Travis gives a good overview of the recent AD comings and goings. If you want a state of the industry this is the pod for you.

🎧 NACMA - an interview with Adam Schemm, Director of Athletics at University of Wisconsin-Parkside. It’s a good look at how DII operates.

Thank you so much for reading this week’s issue.

I hope I drew some attention to student fees that hasn’t been there before. More people should be talking about it! If you enjoyed this week’s issue, let me know by replying to this email. Also - do you like the new format/style of the email? Let me know.

Thanks again for your time.

Best,

Greg Chick, PhD
Data Analyst

This dataset was made with pure shoe leather. Going school-by-school, combing the Bursar, Admissions, and every other page on the school’s website for any information on the fees students pay. Not easy to do for 130+ FBS schools, but it’s comprehensive. Check the data out yourselves.