Read on Twitter
How have creative departments evolved in college athletics over the last decade?
A thread
A thread
Using Wayback Machine and current staff directories on athletic dept websites, this is a look at Division I FBS schools
“Power 5” and “Group of 5” were not a thing back in 2010-11, but since this is looking at current P5 schools, the group was kept for consistency
“Power 5” and “Group of 5” were not a thing back in 2010-11, but since this is looking at current P5 schools, the group was kept for consistency
During the winter of 2010-11, there were 8 creative depts out of 54 “Power 5” schools analyzed
(Not all 65 P5 schools were captured using the Wayback Machine. If it was unclear or what was available using the tool didn’t fit the timeframe, it wasn’t used)
(Not all 65 P5 schools were captured using the Wayback Machine. If it was unclear or what was available using the tool didn’t fit the timeframe, it wasn’t used)
Those same 54 schools in 2020-21? There are now 39 creative depts
Over 10 years, that’s an increase of nearly 5x, going from 15% of schools to 72%
Over 10 years, that’s an increase of nearly 5x, going from 15% of schools to 72%
What this study doesn’t show: if “creatives” existed at all in an athletic dept
Of course they did/do, but some schools tuck those roles into communications or marketing depts. They did it in 2010-11 and they do it today. This shows schools who elevate it enough to its own dept
Of course they did/do, but some schools tuck those roles into communications or marketing depts. They did it in 2010-11 and they do it today. This shows schools who elevate it enough to its own dept
However, a “creative” in college athletics at the start of the last decade also meant something a little different
What do I mean?
The @jasonmatheson's and @dsmolls's of the world can tell you, but that to some meant “internet services” or “website services”
What do I mean?
The @jasonmatheson's and @dsmolls's of the world can tell you, but that to some meant “internet services” or “website services”
You could say managing the school website was the "Instagram of the day" to start the 2010s decade
Social media was around — but it wasn’t a priority for most athletic depts compared to today (you couldn't even tweet with embedded pics or video yet)
Social media was around — but it wasn’t a priority for most athletic depts compared to today (you couldn't even tweet with embedded pics or video yet)
There were about 13 “website services” depts at P5 schools in 2010-11
In some ways, from a resources and personnel standpoint, that was a “creative” dept. But times change. And so those depts could have been folded into other depts or given new names
In some ways, from a resources and personnel standpoint, that was a “creative” dept. But times change. And so those depts could have been folded into other depts or given new names
Now let’s look at today’s creative depts…
Around 45% of Division I FBS athletic depts currently have them (58 out of 130)
Of those 58, 39 exist in the Power 5
In other words, 60% of P5 schools have a creative dept while 29% of G5 do
Around 45% of Division I FBS athletic depts currently have them (58 out of 130)
Of those 58, 39 exist in the Power 5
In other words, 60% of P5 schools have a creative dept while 29% of G5 do
As for a digital/video dept, 48% of DI athletic depts have this today
Of the 63 counted in this analysis, 42 are in the “Power 5” and 21 in the “Group of 5” (64% vs. 32%)
Context: there were at least 35 video depts in 2010-11
Of the 63 counted in this analysis, 42 are in the “Power 5” and 21 in the “Group of 5” (64% vs. 32%)
Context: there were at least 35 video depts in 2010-11
tl;dr
The existence of creative depts at Power 5 schools has increased 5x times in the last decade
Today, P5 schools have double the amount of creative depts and video/digital depts vs. G5 schools
The existence of creative depts at Power 5 schools has increased 5x times in the last decade
Today, P5 schools have double the amount of creative depts and video/digital depts vs. G5 schools
What’s the point of this?
To show progress has been made in the areas of creatives in college athletics. The importance has increased significantly in the last 4-5 years (b/c recruiting) — and hopefully even more in the last 13 months — and it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere
To show progress has been made in the areas of creatives in college athletics. The importance has increased significantly in the last 4-5 years (b/c recruiting) — and hopefully even more in the last 13 months — and it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere
Texas A&M even announced a donor campaign to grow its creative and digital (h/t @wachalyitcs 
). I don't remember seeing something like this before where there's a direct fundraising effort for what some call the "next college athletics arms race" https://twitter.com/12thManFndtn/status/1379925165044285448?s=20
). I don't remember seeing something like this before where there's a direct fundraising effort for what some call the "next college athletics arms race" https://twitter.com/12thManFndtn/status/1379925165044285448?s=20
Also my opinion: when football coaching staffs get away from requesting 50-60 graphics a week for high school recruits, could “sport-specific” creatives be rolled into a bigger dept with other creatives covering the rest of athletics?
Think a creative agency/shop within athletics. It does exist in some places already (examples: Tennessee, Oregon State, Texas A&M, Indiana, Notre Dame in some ways) but who’s next?
Seems like a logical — and impactful — step for the overall equity of sports/athletes
Seems like a logical — and impactful — step for the overall equity of sports/athletes
But looking back at the start of the last decade and comparing it to today, there has been good progress
But it also makes you wonder: what’s it going to look like in a year? 5 years? In 2030?
But it also makes you wonder: what’s it going to look like in a year? 5 years? In 2030?
