In a brief special meeting Tuesday, the Virginia Tech Board of Visitors voted 13-1 to increase funding for intercollegiate athletics in a bid to remain competitive with other schools in a dramatically changing college sports environment.
John Rocovich, the board’s rector, called the vote — which will add $229.2 million to athletics spending over the next four years — “a pivotal moment” for Virginia Tech.
Virginia Tech President Tim Sands said that the increased spending is “critical for the regional economy” and that sports are important to a college because they create “an indelible shared experience” for alumni and draw national attention to the school. However, he added, “We also recognize that this strategic decision to invest discretionary resources in athletics now may limit our flexibility in the near future, and we will be closely monitoring this investment to ensure the funds are spent wisely.”
The lone vote in opposition came from board member Nancy Dye, a retired Roanoke doctor, who said she objected to the part of the plan that involves raising mandatory student fees from $732 this year to $1,032 by 2029.
“In recent weeks I’ve heard from too many families who have struggled to send their families to Virginia Tech,” she said. “My concern is it shifts those costs to those very families.”
The goal is for slightly more than half of the new funding to come from donors — a projected $120 million out of the total $229.2 million — but the plan does call for collecting an additional $21.3 million in mandatory student fees.
In presenting the plan, Tech officials noted that the university’s mandatory student fees for athletics would remain lower than many other state-supported schools. Amy Sebring, Virginia Tech’s executive vice president and chief operating officer who presented the plan to the board, noted that under Sands, Tech has raised the percentage of the athletic budget funded by student fees from 2% to 15%. This plan would raise it to 20%, the maximum allowed by state law, she said.
The overall move to ramp up Tech’s spending on intercollegiate athletics comes amid a dramatically changing economic environment in college sports. The financial gap between conferences has been widening, with the Atlantic Coast Conference in which Virginia Tech plays near the bottom of the so-called “Power 5” conferences that have traditionally dominated the landscape. The Business of College Sports website says that Big Ten schools get an average of $71.8 million each year from their TV contract; the Southeastern Conference schools $68.75 million. The teams in the ACC get $17.1 million, the website says.
Update: Virginia Tech says that website’s figures are wrong. In a statement, the school says: “Virginia Tech’s FY25 conference revenue was $41.5 million. Due to a new viewership-based model adopted by the ACC in response to the FSU/Clemson lawsuit, we estimate a $6 million reduction for Virginia Tech in the current fiscal year, bringing our expected distribution to $35.5 million for FY26.”
Two court cases seem set to exacerbate this wealth gap. One is the settlement in the House vs. NCAA case in California that will allow colleges to directly pay student-athletes, “marking the dawn of a new era in college sports,” according to ESPN. The other is the settlement in lawsuits by Clemson and Florida State, who sought to leave the ACC. For now, they will remain in the league, but the once-prohibitive exit fee declines each year until it reaches $75 million in 2030. That’s considered a rate that some schools could afford if they think they can jump to a higher-paying conference. While the ACC TV contract runs through 2036, the Big Ten’s TV contract expires in 2030 — the same year that the ACC exit fee reaches its lowest point. There’s widespread speculation that will trigger a new round of conference realignment — realignment for which Tech may not be presently well-suited unless it raises its athletic spending to better compete with other schools.
The Tech Board of Visitors held a retreat in August where athletic spending was discussed. “The board’s message was clear,” Sebring said. “Increase funding and increase it now.”
Before the Tech board approved the new spending plan, it adopted an amendment that has the effect of elevating the school’s athletic goals. Instead of wanting to be competitive with other schools in the ACC, the amendment changed that to the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The practical effect is that the board is now on record declaring its intention not just to compete with 17 other schools in the ACC, but with “the best institutions” nationwide.
The revised language also declares that “academics is the cornerstone of Virginia Tech as a land grant institution” and that the board “will provide more specific oversight and accountability on spending across all athletics programs.” Sands said he would appoint an Athletics Investment Oversight Committee.
“It has never been clearer that the future of Hokie Athletics will depend on the institutional commitment to compete, in partnership with our alumni and supporters,” Sands said in a written statement. “Today, we are stepping up to compete, and we ask our loyal fans and generous donors to step forward with us.”
A news release from Virginia Tech after the board vote said the new funding would allow the school “to modernize its athletic operations to be competitive in a new, more professionalized environment.”
It listed five areas that funding would go toward. In Tech’s words, they are:
- A new “front office” for football to manage recruiting, talent development and operations.
- Resources to attract and retain talented coaches in a highly competitive market
- Additional operating support for athletics teams
- Investments in Olympic sports
- Infrastructure improvements to several of facilities to improve the athlete and fan experience
The news release from Tech also said: “The university remains committed to protecting lower-income Virginia students, those eligible for Virginia Tech Advantage, and graduate students receiving university stipends from fee increases included in this plan.”
The board took no public comment during its 31-minute virtual meeting. After the vote, it heard from several faculty and student representatives, who voiced concern about the increase in mandatory student fees.