Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
Author Message
GoCougars Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 146
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For: Houston
Location: Houston-Inner Looper
Post: #121
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-20-2017 08:24 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  
(04-11-2017 02:33 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Off the top of my head


Texas


aTm





TexasTech
Baylor
TCU
Houston



SMU
Rice

North Texas
UTEP
UTSA
TexasState

Sam Houston
Stephen F Austin
UT Arlington
UT Pan Am

aTm Corpus Christi
Lamar
Houston Baptist
Dallas Baptist

Prairie View
Texas Southern
Pulling the numbers from the link posted yesterday it looks like I was off on a couple. The Aggies were slightly ahead of the Longhorns in revenue, Lamar is better off than I thought, and the HBCU schools are up with others. Revised listing (privates don't report so I put them where I think they would go):

aTm 192,000,000
UT 183,000,000

Texas Tech 80,000,000
Baylor NR
TCU NR

Houston 44,000,000
SMU NR

Texas State 34,000,000
NoTexas 31,000,000
UTEP 29,000,000
UTSA 27,000,000
Rice NR

Lamar 16,000,000
Sam Houston 16,000,000
Stephen F Austin 16,000,000

UT Arlington 12,000,000
A&M Corpus Christi 11,000,000
UT Rio Grande Valley 10,000,000
Texas Southern 10,000,000
Prairie View 10,000,000
Houston Baptist NR

Interesting that if Houston had the same media payout as the Big 12(30 million/ school), the Texas Tech and Houston revenues would be nearly the same. Give Houston a Big 12 schedule and I would bet Houston's revenues would match Texas Tech's.
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2017 01:07 PM by GoCougars.)
04-20-2017 01:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #122
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-20-2017 08:24 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  
(04-11-2017 02:33 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Off the top of my head


Texas


aTm





TexasTech
Baylor
TCU
Houston



SMU
Rice

North Texas
UTEP
UTSA
TexasState

Sam Houston
Stephen F Austin
UT Arlington
UT Pan Am

aTm Corpus Christi
Lamar
Houston Baptist
Dallas Baptist

Prairie View
Texas Southern
Pulling the numbers from the link posted yesterday it looks like I was off on a couple. The Aggies were slightly ahead of the Longhorns in revenue, Lamar is better off than I thought, and the HBCU schools are up with others. Revised listing (privates don't report so I put them where I think they would go):

aTm 192,000,000
UT 183,000,000

Texas Tech 80,000,000
Baylor NR
TCU NR

Houston 44,000,000
SMU NR

Texas State 34,000,000
NoTexas 31,000,000
UTEP 29,000,000
UTSA 27,000,000
Rice NR

Lamar 16,000,000
Sam Houston 16,000,000
Stephen F Austin 16,000,000

UT Arlington 12,000,000
A&M Corpus Christi 11,000,000
UT Rio Grande Valley 10,000,000
Texas Southern 10,000,000
Prairie View 10,000,000
Houston Baptist NR

You should average over a couple of years to get a more accurate number.
04-20-2017 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
loki_the_bubba Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,697
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 701
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #123
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-20-2017 01:03 PM)GoCougars Wrote:  
(04-20-2017 08:24 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  
(04-11-2017 02:33 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Off the top of my head


Texas


aTm





TexasTech
Baylor
TCU
Houston



SMU
Rice

North Texas
UTEP
UTSA
TexasState

Sam Houston
Stephen F Austin
UT Arlington
UT Pan Am

aTm Corpus Christi
Lamar
Houston Baptist
Dallas Baptist

Prairie View
Texas Southern
Pulling the numbers from the link posted yesterday it looks like I was off on a couple. The Aggies were slightly ahead of the Longhorns in revenue, Lamar is better off than I thought, and the HBCU schools are up with others. Revised listing (privates don't report so I put them where I think they would go):

aTm 192,000,000
UT 183,000,000

Texas Tech 80,000,000
Baylor NR
TCU NR

Houston 44,000,000
SMU NR

Texas State 34,000,000
NoTexas 31,000,000
UTEP 29,000,000
UTSA 27,000,000
Rice NR

Lamar 16,000,000
Sam Houston 16,000,000
Stephen F Austin 16,000,000

UT Arlington 12,000,000
A&M Corpus Christi 11,000,000
UT Rio Grande Valley 10,000,000
Texas Southern 10,000,000
Prairie View 10,000,000
Houston Baptist NR

Interesting that if Houston had the same media payout as the Big 12(30 million/ school), the Texas Tech and Houston revenues would be nearly the same. Give Houston a Big 12 schedule and I would bet Houston's revenues would match Texas Tech's.

IF frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their butts.
04-20-2017 11:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Insane_Baboon Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,669
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 52
I Root For: VT & UCF
Location:
Post: #124
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-20-2017 08:24 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  
(04-11-2017 02:33 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  Off the top of my head


Texas


aTm





TexasTech
Baylor
TCU
Houston



SMU
Rice

North Texas
UTEP
UTSA
TexasState

Sam Houston
Stephen F Austin
UT Arlington
UT Pan Am

aTm Corpus Christi
Lamar
Houston Baptist
Dallas Baptist

Prairie View
Texas Southern
Pulling the numbers from the link posted yesterday it looks like I was off on a couple. The Aggies were slightly ahead of the Longhorns in revenue, Lamar is better off than I thought, and the HBCU schools are up with others. Revised listing (privates don't report so I put them where I think they would go):

aTm 192,000,000
UT 183,000,000

Texas Tech 80,000,000
Baylor NR
TCU NR

Houston 44,000,000
SMU NR

Texas State 34,000,000
NoTexas 31,000,000
UTEP 29,000,000
UTSA 27,000,000
Rice NR

Lamar 16,000,000
Sam Houston 16,000,000
Stephen F Austin 16,000,000

UT Arlington 12,000,000
A&M Corpus Christi 11,000,000
UT Rio Grande Valley 10,000,000
Texas Southern 10,000,000
Prairie View 10,000,000
Houston Baptist NR

Aggies were only up because of the stadium donations. It was a one time thing, you can see at the top they're +$73MM compared to the previous year. Longhorns will be back being to the highest revenue athletic department in the country this year unless another school has a large one-time increase.
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2017 11:29 PM by Insane_Baboon.)
04-20-2017 11:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sctvman Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,097
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 46
I Root For: C of Charleston
Location: Charleston, SC
Post: #125
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
Texas spent over $850K on new LOCKERS for the football players, maybe more (that's if there are only 85 lockers). Each locker cost $10,500. They certainly aren't hurting for money at all.
04-21-2017 10:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,281
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 217
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #126
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-21-2017 10:36 AM)sctvman Wrote:  Texas spent over $850K on new LOCKERS for the football players, maybe more (that's if there are only 85 lockers). Each locker cost $10,500. They certainly aren't hurting for money at all.

With the world hurting so bad, it's good to know that the Longhorns' jockstraps' needs are fully covered.

I'm more annoyed that other schools feel like they have to keep up with that kind of stuff.
04-21-2017 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WakeForestRanger Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,740
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 92
I Root For: Wake Forest
Location:
Post: #127
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
1. UNC
2. Duke

3. NC State
4. Wake Forest




5. East Carolina

6.Charlotte
7. App State
8. Davidson
9. UNCW

The Rest
(This post was last modified: 04-21-2017 02:22 PM by WakeForestRanger.)
04-21-2017 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Insane_Baboon Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,669
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 52
I Root For: VT & UCF
Location:
Post: #128
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-21-2017 10:36 AM)sctvman Wrote:  Texas spent over $850K on new LOCKERS for the football players, maybe more (that's if there are only 85 lockers). Each locker cost $10,500. They certainly aren't hurting for money at all.
I don't know how many lockers they're getting but it's going to be a $10 million full locker room renovation.
04-21-2017 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GTFletch Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,927
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 290
I Root For: Georgia Tech
Location: Georgia
Post: #129
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-09-2017 09:40 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  In Georgia I would say:

10 University of Georgia - The Bulldogs gobble up most of the resources in the state and because of the structure of Georgia's Board of Regents all of the state schools come second or third behind UGA.

8 Georgia Tech - The Yellow Jackets get a lot of support from the BOR as well but still fall second to UGA. Being in the ACC and also in the Atlanta market does help them and they are certainly not hurting for money.

6 Georgia State - The Panthers fall a distant third in support from the BOR but they have a huge enrollment and benefit from being in the rich Atlanta market as well. A recent merger with Georgia Perimeter has made them one of the largest schools in the country.

5 Georgia Southern - The Eagles probably get about as much support as Georgia State from the BOR but are not in a rich market. The school is close to Savannah which helps and is the only FBS school in south Georgia which does raise it's profile regionally. In the next few years GS is set to absorb Armstrong St which will give Georgia Southern campuses in three south Georgia cities and raise enrollment by about 30%.

4 Mercer - The Bears are a private school with a rich history and deep pockets. They have all of the resources needed to compete in a Mid-Major FCS conference like the SoCon.

3 Kennesaw State - I don't know as much about Kennesaw St as I do some of the other schools but they do fall well below the FBS schools in the state in terms of resources. Kennesaw also recently merged with another school and has an enrollment of over 30,000 so I have a feeling their profile is on the way up.

1 Savannah State - A HBCU in Savannah this school is notoriously mismanaged and even though they are located in a decent metropolitan area get little support from the community. The state BOR supports Savannah St at the same level as all of it's other mid-tier (most not Div 1) universities but with Georgia Southern currently right down the road and about to move next door (after merging with Armstrong St) they are hurting.
Spot On!
04-21-2017 09:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #130
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-20-2017 01:03 PM)GoCougars Wrote:  Interesting that if Houston had the same media payout as the Big 12(30 million/ school), the Texas Tech and Houston revenues would be nearly the same. Give Houston a Big 12 schedule and I would bet Houston's revenues would match Texas Tech's.

this statement is laughable it ignores the fact that dem coogs doh spend $22 million more in university funds on athletics than Texas Tech does

if you added $22 million more in university funds to the Texas Tech budget they would be well ahead of dem coogs doh even if dem coogs doh were getting Big 12 money

plus there is the fact that you left in the money that dem coogs doh get from the AAC into that calculation as well.....so you have to remove another $4 or $5 million from that as well if you add in Big 12 money

TTU with a $79.98 million in total revenue and $4.26 million from the academic side

dem coogs doh with $44.82 million in total revenue and $25.99 from the academic side

so even doing dem coogs doh math if you added $30 million to that you are at $74.82 million while pretending that the budgets are now "close to the same"

while of course one is spending at a massively unsustainable level from the academic side to have that "the same" budget

if you added $21.73 million more in academic side spending to Texas Tech well their budget would then be $101.71 which is not "the same" as $74.82 it is a great deal higher

and when you subtract even just $4 million in AAC money from a team that is now in a different conference well $70.82 is nowhere close to being "the same" as $101.71 million it is about $31 million away from being the "same" with all things being equal

even if you cut the TTU academic side subsidy back down to what it is now (sustainable at $4.26 million Vs unsustainable at $25.99) and left dem coogs doh with an academic subsidy they have already stated is not sustainable

well you are looking at a budget of $70.82 million Vs a budget of $79.98 which is a large difference especially with the lack of sustainability of that $25.99 million subsidy

if you cut that subsidy down to a Big 12 high of $7.8 million (OkState) then you are looking at looking $52.62 which is hardly close to $79.98

which is why dem coogs doh did not work for the Big 12 they were not interested in a program that needed to subsidize their athletics department to the tune of $18 million more from the academic side than the next highest academic subsidy in the conference just to be at the very very bottom of the conference revenue scale by $10 million dollars or more

and as to the next very weak argument that will be offered up about ticket sales and donations pouring in if a program was in the Big 12......well that is what separates some from the others.....some have fans and supporters that pay to make things happen and some have fans and supporters that talk about what they could do if someone else made something happen instead of going ahead and spending/giving the money to make it happen no matter the conference they are in

a $10 million dollar difference in revenues is not "the same" as another program when it requires $22+ million MORE in unsustainable academic subsidies to be (not) "the same" IE $10 million less
(This post was last modified: 04-23-2017 05:07 AM by TodgeRodge.)
04-23-2017 05:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #131
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-23-2017 05:05 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  dem coogs doh with $44.82 million in total revenue and $25.99 from the academic side

...

while of course one is spending at a massively unsustainable level from the academic side to have that "the same" budget

I know better than to get caught in this dung slinging contest ... but one point must be made clear:

it's not money "from" the "academic side". That is either a horrible misunderstanding on your part, or misinformation.


No school "takes money away" from the core mission of the school.

If you want to call it a subsidy from the school, fine. But the money is either generated, from student fees, or it's money from the general fund that was already budgeted for the athletics dept. No school says "sorry chemistry dept, I know you were supposed to get new beakers this year ... but the basketball team needed new uniforms, so that will have to wait!" 07-coffee3

If the U of Houston generates $20M in student fees for athletics, or it budgets $20M from its general fund for athletics ... then that is what it is, and nothing more can be said of that. It is sustainable. Otherwise, the CFO of the university would never have approved that.
(This post was last modified: 04-23-2017 09:48 AM by MplsBison.)
04-23-2017 09:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #132
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-23-2017 09:46 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(04-23-2017 05:05 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  dem coogs doh with $44.82 million in total revenue and $25.99 from the academic side

...

while of course one is spending at a massively unsustainable level from the academic side to have that "the same" budget

I know better than to get caught in this dung slinging contest ... but one point must be made clear:

it's not money "from" the "academic side". That is either a horrible misunderstanding on your part, or misinformation.


No school "takes money away" from the core mission of the school.

If you want to call it a subsidy from the school, fine. But the money is either generated, from student fees, or it's money from the general fund that was already budgeted for the athletics dept. No school says "sorry chemistry dept, I know you were supposed to get new beakers this year ... but the basketball team needed new uniforms, so that will have to wait!" 07-coffee3

If the U of Houston generates $20M in student fees for athletics, or it budgets $20M from its general fund for athletics ... then that is what it is, and nothing more can be said of that. It is sustainable. Otherwise, the CFO of the university would never have approved that.

leave it to you of all people to get involved and of course to be totally and completely wrong

dem coogs doh generated $7.26 million in student fees for the last year in question from the USA Today link

they spent an additional $18.73 million in school funds over and above that student fee

in Texas ZERO state funding can be used for athletics so the $18.73 did not come from any state funding for "athletics support" that otherwise could not have been spent on but athletics

they have a $660 million dollar endowment so they generate $33 million or so in endowment dollars and much of those would be spoken for by the various things that were endowed with that money when it was donated.....and even if it was all just "slush money" your argument that "because they budgeted it for athletics that does not mean it came at the expense of academics" it totally ridiculous just like many of the points you fail at on this forum

so the money is not coming from endowed funds ir even if some of it is then it is VERY LITTLE of that and still if the money was not spent on athletics then it would absolutely be available to academics

that is like saying "my kid has no shoes and pants with holes in them, but I budgeted this money for eating out and cable TV so you can't blame me for wasting money on cable TV and eating out instead of sending my kid to school clothed properly.....I BUDGETED THAT MONEY FOR CABLE TV AND EATING OUT NOT KIDS CLOTHS!!!!"


and lastly to show how completely wrong you are

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/hou...125669.php

It's also a costly gamble. UH has spent more than $21 million in each of the past three years supporting an athletics program that doesn't make enough money to sustain itself. Last year, UH gave $26 million to its athletics program - the seventh-highest subsidy in the nation, according to an annual analysis of NCAA finances by USA Today. Athletics spending has frustrated some UH faculty and has driven up the cost of attendance. Rising student fees accounted for nearly 20 percent of athletic revenue at UH in 2014.

It's a practice that UH apparently realizes it cannot keep up. Chancellor Renu Khator wrote as much in an email obtained by the Houston Chronicle. If UH does not get into a major conference soon, "it will be difficult for us to sustain it," she wrote in 2014 to a UH professor who sent her an article about college athletics spending.

"It's a big bet and we're not a cash-rich school," Jonathan Snow, the president of UH's faculty senate, said in a recent interview.

so over the last 3 years from the date of that report they spent $68+ million on athletics with only about $21 million of that coming from the dedicated student fee for athletics

who in their right mind would try and argue that a university could not have done something MAJOR for the academic side with $47 million additional dollars sent on ACADEMICS over a three year period....and that would still be with a very large $7+ million dollars a year in dedicated student fees going to athletics which is higher than a very large portion of the P5

that represents a massive number of new faculty, that represents a large portion of a major research building or that represents a massive amount of dollars available to match grants or pay graduate student stipends

but we are all suppose to believe that because "it was budgeted for athletics" buy the administration (that has admitted the amount spent was not sustainable) that academics somehow does not miss that money

that is the most brain dead argument in history

and again you can't use the "well if they got in the Big 12 and got $30 million they could cut that subsidy".......because as I have already showed the results of cutting that subsidy down to even something VERY HIGH relative to other P5 schools cuts the dem coogs doh athletics budget down to something EXTREMELY LOW relative to other P5 schools especially those in the Big 12......it would cut it down to something like $58 million with a subsidy still in the $7 million dollar range which as I showed is nowhere close to $80 million dollars with a subsidy in the $4 million dollar range......not to mention the multi-year buy in that would have happened to gain membership and the fact that Big 12 revenues per team would have ALL taken a hit
(This post was last modified: 04-23-2017 10:34 AM by TodgeRodge.)
04-23-2017 10:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ArQ Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,076
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 32
I Root For: Pitt/Louisville
Location: Most beautiful place
Post: #133
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-21-2017 04:41 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  
(04-21-2017 10:36 AM)sctvman Wrote:  Texas spent over $850K on new LOCKERS for the football players, maybe more (that's if there are only 85 lockers). Each locker cost $10,500. They certainly aren't hurting for money at all.
I don't know how many lockers they're getting but it's going to be a $10 million full locker room renovation.

Does Texas fill the lockers with cash (in hidden compartment)? Locker is locker. What does $10,500 locker do?
04-23-2017 06:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #134
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-23-2017 06:55 PM)ArQ Wrote:  
(04-21-2017 04:41 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  
(04-21-2017 10:36 AM)sctvman Wrote:  Texas spent over $850K on new LOCKERS for the football players, maybe more (that's if there are only 85 lockers). Each locker cost $10,500. They certainly aren't hurting for money at all.
I don't know how many lockers they're getting but it's going to be a $10 million full locker room renovation.

Does Texas fill the lockers with cash (in hidden compartment)? Locker is locker. What does $10,500 locker do?

unfortunately right now for Texas it attracts players that are soft, entitled, believe that their locker and the helmet sticker win games for them and it attracts the morons and fools
04-23-2017 07:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IAH Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 639
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #135
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-23-2017 10:30 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(04-23-2017 09:46 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(04-23-2017 05:05 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  dem coogs doh with $44.82 million in total revenue and $25.99 from the academic side

...

while of course one is spending at a massively unsustainable level from the academic side to have that "the same" budget

I know better than to get caught in this dung slinging contest ... but one point must be made clear:

it's not money "from" the "academic side". That is either a horrible misunderstanding on your part, or misinformation.


No school "takes money away" from the core mission of the school.

If you want to call it a subsidy from the school, fine. But the money is either generated, from student fees, or it's money from the general fund that was already budgeted for the athletics dept. No school says "sorry chemistry dept, I know you were supposed to get new beakers this year ... but the basketball team needed new uniforms, so that will have to wait!" 07-coffee3

If the U of Houston generates $20M in student fees for athletics, or it budgets $20M from its general fund for athletics ... then that is what it is, and nothing more can be said of that. It is sustainable. Otherwise, the CFO of the university would never have approved that.

leave it to you of all people to get involved and of course to be totally and completely wrong

dem coogs doh generated $7.26 million in student fees for the last year in question from the USA Today link

they spent an additional $18.73 million in school funds over and above that student fee

in Texas ZERO state funding can be used for athletics so the $18.73 did not come from any state funding for "athletics support" that otherwise could not have been spent on but athletics

they have a $660 million dollar endowment so they generate $33 million or so in endowment dollars and much of those would be spoken for by the various things that were endowed with that money when it was donated.....and even if it was all just "slush money" your argument that "because they budgeted it for athletics that does not mean it came at the expense of academics" it totally ridiculous just like many of the points you fail at on this forum

so the money is not coming from endowed funds ir even if some of it is then it is VERY LITTLE of that and still if the money was not spent on athletics then it would absolutely be available to academics

that is like saying "my kid has no shoes and pants with holes in them, but I budgeted this money for eating out and cable TV so you can't blame me for wasting money on cable TV and eating out instead of sending my kid to school clothed properly.....I BUDGETED THAT MONEY FOR CABLE TV AND EATING OUT NOT KIDS CLOTHS!!!!"


and lastly to show how completely wrong you are

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/hou...125669.php

It's also a costly gamble. UH has spent more than $21 million in each of the past three years supporting an athletics program that doesn't make enough money to sustain itself. Last year, UH gave $26 million to its athletics program - the seventh-highest subsidy in the nation, according to an annual analysis of NCAA finances by USA Today. Athletics spending has frustrated some UH faculty and has driven up the cost of attendance. Rising student fees accounted for nearly 20 percent of athletic revenue at UH in 2014.

It's a practice that UH apparently realizes it cannot keep up. Chancellor Renu Khator wrote as much in an email obtained by the Houston Chronicle. If UH does not get into a major conference soon, "it will be difficult for us to sustain it," she wrote in 2014 to a UH professor who sent her an article about college athletics spending.

"It's a big bet and we're not a cash-rich school," Jonathan Snow, the president of UH's faculty senate, said in a recent interview.

so over the last 3 years from the date of that report they spent $68+ million on athletics with only about $21 million of that coming from the dedicated student fee for athletics

who in their right mind would try and argue that a university could not have done something MAJOR for the academic side with $47 million additional dollars sent on ACADEMICS over a three year period....and that would still be with a very large $7+ million dollars a year in dedicated student fees going to athletics which is higher than a very large portion of the P5

that represents a massive number of new faculty, that represents a large portion of a major research building or that represents a massive amount of dollars available to match grants or pay graduate student stipends

but we are all suppose to believe that because "it was budgeted for athletics" buy the administration (that has admitted the amount spent was not sustainable) that academics somehow does not miss that money

that is the most brain dead argument in history

and again you can't use the "well if they got in the Big 12 and got $30 million they could cut that subsidy".......because as I have already showed the results of cutting that subsidy down to even something VERY HIGH relative to other P5 schools cuts the dem coogs doh athletics budget down to something EXTREMELY LOW relative to other P5 schools especially those in the Big 12......it would cut it down to something like $58 million with a subsidy still in the $7 million dollar range which as I showed is nowhere close to $80 million dollars with a subsidy in the $4 million dollar range......not to mention the multi-year buy in that would have happened to gain membership and the fact that Big 12 revenues per team would have ALL taken a hit

Give me a break, try playing a cusa schedule for 20 years and see what that does to your athletic program. You are clearly worried of one day having to compete with UH on a level playing field.

Also... how can one write as much as you did without punctuation is beyond me.
04-24-2017 12:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sctvman Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,097
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 46
I Root For: C of Charleston
Location: Charleston, SC
Post: #136
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-09-2017 10:08 AM)sctvman Wrote:  SC has 12 Division I programs, more than almost any state of our size (less than 5 million population). They are at varying rates of resources, but the big schools, of course are at the top.

1a. South Carolina (10)- SEC money has helped to make Carolina one of the fastest growing ADs in the country. Before the SEC (25 years ago), it was a school with no identity. Now, it is doing well in most sports, with the basketball success only helping.

1b. Clemson (10)- Basically no gap between Carolina and Clemson. Clemson's football facilities rival a couple of the NFL teams. Their football money allowed them to renovate their baseball stadium and basketball arena, and the school's prestige has only grown since Dabo came in.

Huge gap

3. Coastal Carolina (probably a 6): Coastal has become the #3 in the past few years, with the baseball national title, football going to Sun Belt, more media coverage, and the new basketball arena. As recently as the late 2000s, CCU was probably 6 or 7.

4. The Citadel (5): Citadel has a lot of resources for a FCS. Large football stadium, a league (the SoCon) which they can do very well in after schools like App and Georgia Southern left, lots of old money alums who spend a lot of money into the program.

5. Wofford (5): A school with a small enrollment that does very well. Has been very consistent in football and basketball the last 20 years, has Jerry Richardson (Panthers owner)'s backing, with a arena named after him, and Panthers training camp.

6. Furman (5): Another school with a lot of money headed to it. Has added lacrosse in the last few years, growing market, and many of the same resources as The Citadel (Furman's long-standing rival).

7. College of Charleston (5): Growing program. 2/3 female students, has no football team, but has grown in prestige with the new basketball arena, and their conference move has helped them recruit students throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast.

4-7 is interchangeable. There is a gap though to the rest.

8. Winthrop (4): Basically a men's basketball school to most observers, but good in soccer and other sports. Stuck in the shadow of other Charlotte area schools. Sends out a lot of teachers.

9. Presbyterian (3.5): Small school in a small town (40 miles from Greenville, 60 from Columbia). Hasn't really had success in most sports since they moved to D1. Does have a pharmacy school and some well-to-do alums.

10. Charleston Southern (3): The third school in Charleston. Football has improved over the past few years, but basketball still plays in 900 seat gym. Just lost their head coach to a coordinator position at Coastal. Doesn't have a lot of resources, but have done pretty well with what they have.

11. USC-Upstate (2.5): Basically an outlier. Only SC school in A-Sun, and hasn't grown an identity since they joined D1 about a decade ago. Still treated as a "branch campus" by Columbia.

12. SC State (2): Has been a threat of closing at pretty much all times over the past decade. Came very close to happening, but school has stabilized over the past year. Football program does well, but basketball draws poor attendance, and has no baseball program.

Some of the D2s in SC actually do very well. Newberry, Francis Marion, and USC-Aiken would possibly be D1s in other states.

Updating this from last year I’d say CofC may have moved up to #6. Furman, Wofford, CofC and The Citadel are still interchangeable, but CofC has made some good choices with the Earl Grant hiring (taking them to the tourney this year), and hiring Holbrook from South Carolina. That proves they are serious in their two big sports.

In basketball, CofC is probably the #4 program in the state, maybe even #3, only behind USC and Clemson.
03-26-2018 03:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jacksfan29 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 592
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 19
I Root For: So Dak St/CU
Location: Western Colorado
Post: #137
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
(04-11-2017 10:20 AM)geef Wrote:  9 - Denver. Top-notch facilities for a non-football school. Magness Arena - at 7200 capacity - is a perfect size for hockey and basketball. New stadiums for soccer and lacrosse, and great facilities for the Olympic sports (volleyball, gymnastics, swimming, tennis, etc.). Plus, the school has deep pockets and a commitment to athletic success.

8 - Colorado. The Buffs have dramatically improved their facilities over the past few years, including a new performance center. This still lag behind most of their Pac-12 brethren. Folsom Field is one of the prettiest places to watch a football game.

6.5 (and closing fast) - Colorado State. Open an on-campus stadium - with a New Belgium Brewery viewing deck - this fall. That should get them a rating of 11. Moby Arena draws good crowds for the MWC, and can be a solid home court advantage.

6 - Air Force Academy. Football stadium is a bit dated, but they have quite a nice athletics complex. Intercollegiate athletics are completely interwoven into the USAFA experience.

3 - Northern Colorado. Relatively simple facilities, and not many deep pockets supporting the program.

You must be kidding, right? DU over both CU and CSU? Sorry, no. CU has an $89 million dollar budget and percent of state handout is less then 17%.

1. CU
* no one is even close
2. CSU
* need to get a P5 slot to really grow
3. Air Force
* Academy, they will never hurt for support but it isn't a top priority
4. DU
* rich, hockey, terrible in both Men's and Women's BB. Great in non-revenue sports, odd mix of sports keeps them out of being accepted into stronger leagues
5. UNC
* new to D1, a lot of teachers (poor) as alumni. Greeley? They are what they are

My home state of South Dakota? Easy.

1. South Dakota State (growing every year)
2. The eastern South Dakota D2 schools
3. University of South Dakota (still trying to figure this D1 thing out)
03-26-2018 03:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrueBlueDrew Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,551
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 486
I Root For: Jawjuh Suthen
Location: Enemy Turf
Post: #138
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
1. UGA - Superpower, no question. Controls the state of Georgia from the trailer parks all the way up to the Governor's house.

gap

2. GT - middling ACC school, makes tons off P5 status but largely more focused on academics.

gap

3a. Georgia Southern
3b. Georgia State

- while USA Today lists Georgia Southern as having a larger budget, Georgia State is an up-and-comer. They have tons and tons of ad space and fortune 500 companies right across the street to draw sponsorships from. They recently bought and converted an MLB stadium into a football stadium and they will soon build a new basketball arena. Meanwhile, Georgia Southern has a large budget, a large donor base, and an expanding footprint in South Georgia. Being right up the road from Savannah and Augusta, the second and third largest cities in Georgia with virtually untapped markets, means Georgia Southern has plenty of room to expand. Both schools are in the top 4 in the state in attendance (and academics for public schools). The two schools are now locked in an arms race for the #3 spot.

gap

5. Mercer - Solid facilities and budget for a private SoCon school. The only large university in the major city it's located in. Used to be a midmajor basketball power.

6. Kennesaw State - decent facilities, brand new to FCS football so still trying to build a brand and a following

small gap

7. West Georgia - Great football recently at the D2 level. Not much else.

8. Valdosta State - Great football legacy at the D2 level. Not much else.

9. Savannah St - Dropping from FCS back D2, poorly managed school and program

10-? All the Peach Belt schools
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2018 04:30 PM by TrueBlueDrew.)
03-26-2018 04:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 50,013
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #139
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
Louisiana

1) LSU .... "Unlimited" resources as they are defined here, dominates the whole state, even down in New Orleans and 300 miles away in Shreveport.

In 2017, LSU literally had more athletic spending then the next nine schools put together.

-
-
-
-

2) Tulane ... Elite academic status equals rich alumni and growing NOLA corporate support. On the rise after decades of flailing.

-
-

3) ULL and LA-Tech

-

4) Southeastern, UL-Monroe, Northwestern
5) Grambling, Nicholls, SUBR
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2018 04:33 PM by quo vadis.)
03-26-2018 04:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrimsonPhantom Offline
CUSA Curator
*

Posts: 41,344
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 2371
I Root For: NM State
Location:
Post: #140
RE: Rank Division I programs in your state in terms of resources
New Mexico-2

UNM- Has the state coffers at its disposal and most of the the Legislature are UNM grads.

NMSU- Has to justify every penny it spends.

Recent events further illustrate athletics discrepancy between UNM and New Mexico State:
https://www.lcsun-news.com/story/sports/...408100002/
03-26-2018 05:05 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.