Division I American football coaches who are more attractive may be paid less - WVU researchers

[Mingle]

Aggressiveness was also measured but pay only increased for the most aggressive looking coaches.

The research team, including Humphreys, associate professor Guodong Guo and graduate students Yang Zhou and Mohammad Iqbal Nouyed, used data from three sources:

• Salary information for all NCAA Division I head coaches from 2014-2016.

• Photos of all NCAA Division I head coaches from 2014-2016.

• The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Adult Faces Database, which contains 10,168 facial photos from the adult U.S. population. This database was utilized to help identify and predict facial characteristics applicable to the coaches’ photos.

It’s important to note that aggressiveness doesn’t necessarily mean “ugly.” In fact, researchers found an upward trend between a coaches attractiveness rating and their aggressiveness rating so there is a potential link among the two. But when it came to their salary, only the most aggressive coaches seemed to overcome their attractiveness and got a higher salary than usual so their attractiveness seemed to have a bigger overall correlation in their pay than their aggressiveness.

Like in any study, only so much can be figured out based on a variety of limitations but it is an interesting look in how we may think in a conscious and subconscious way. Obviously, how a coach looks has nothing to do with how they coach but it’s tougher to tell your subconscious that. Either way, score one for us non-models.

---

https://thecomeback.com/ncaa/divisio...searchers.html

[Jehan]

I don't get university sport.

Can someone explain me why a good sportman would go play for free in university rather than directly play profssionnaly as in the rest of the world?

[Mingle]

I don't get university sport.

Can someone explain me why a good sportman would go play for free in university rather than directly play profssionnaly as in the rest of the world?

1. Most American sports (like American football) are not played at a very high quality (and thus don't pay well) outside America.

2. Americans sports "clubs" are not like the football clubs of Europe with their own youth system that scouts talents. They're franchises and they recruit people after seeing how good they perform in universities. European sports clubs/franchises recruit people when they're still kids often or teens whereas American ones recruit them after they finish university.

3. Saying that they're "playing for free" is too simplistic. The players in NCAA (college/university) teams are usually there based on scholarships. Scholarships are given to high school students that the college feels are promising prospects. And since the education quality of these colleges is high, the tuition fees are expensive. Its common for them to cost $25,000 per semester (or $50,000 per year). So these scholarships at universities are saving them tens of thousands of dollars in their education. So technically, in a way they are getting paid (indirectly) by having their tuition costs massively reduced/eliminated. Many foreigners (who are mostly from European countries) also come to attend university in America to play sports (mainly basketball & volleyball). After university is over, they typically go play for a professional sports (basketball/volleyball) club or they end up majoring in an academic field that they get a job in later.

4. Playing in university is part of the pathway to professionalism in American sport. First, outstanding high school athletes get noticed by good colleges. Then, outstanding college athletes get noticed by professional teams.