panama
Legend
Posts: 31,353
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 633
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
Umm...two paragraphs equals fancy. But kudos for getting r done
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
|
|
07-06-2017 10:27 PM |
|
gulfcoastgal
All American
Posts: 4,299
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 400
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 09:34 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: (07-06-2017 06:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote: The AAC has 4 of the top 5, with UConn comfortably at #1, but surprisingly, to me, west coast schools are well-represented, with 5 of the top 11, moreso than the overall revenue figures would indicate. Reason? western schools don't use the truly massive $20m+ subsidies that the AAC schools use. IMO, this reveals the hidden strength of west coast schools in deriving athletic revenues.
This does not surprise me at all. Other than San Diego State and San Jose State, none of the MWC has competition from pro sports.
Also only 2 MWC schools are on the West Coast, so the MWC doesn't have the West Coast cultural indifference to sports. Even Fresno has more in common with Arkansas than it does with the beach communities and big cities on the West coast.
It appears as if state governments in the mountainous region are more willing to subsidize. How state governments support sports
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2017 07:06 AM by gulfcoastgal.)
|
|
07-07-2017 06:33 AM |
|
quo vadis
Legend
Posts: 50,235
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2445
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 08:18 PM)otown Wrote: (07-06-2017 06:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote: (07-06-2017 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: One thing Im noticing is that some schools apparently count capital spending in their annual budgets and some do not. That potentially creates some massive problems when comparing budgets. Just as an example, Houston currently has about 80 million in capital athletics projects underway. Of that amount, about 50 million of it is funded by private donations. If these expenditures were included, Houston numbers would reflect a budget of over 100 million and it would probably sit at the top of your list of budgets minus student fees and transfers. Not only that, but the capital expenditures for UH since 2013 is well over a quarter of a billion--more than half of which is all private donations. So it would have affected almost every year since 2013.
I don't know how USA Today accounts for capital projects. I guess they don't include them either, otherwise Houston would be way above the $51 million in overall revenue they list them at. I guess in their way of reckoning, such things don't count.
As a USF fan, this list is really sobering to me. Schools like Hawaii and Arkansas State are generating a lot more athletic dollars than we are. That is pretty sad.
Does this have anything to do with the lack of an OCS?
It almost surely does. Without an OCS, USF has limited control over revenue streams. E.g., here in Baton Rouge, if LSU wants to boost stadium revenue, they tack on another 3,000 club seats. USF can't do that. We can't make changes to the Bucs stadium, and we don't get to keep all the revenue generated.
It's not a good long-term situation.
|
|
07-07-2017 06:45 AM |
|
quo vadis
Legend
Posts: 50,235
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2445
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 08:16 PM)gulfcoastgal Wrote: After quickly glancing through this list, Boise, Memphis and New Mexico appear to be the only schools that generated more money from their fan bases than they received from the school in 15/16. Ticket Sales + Contributions > Student Fees + School Funds
Yes, I was going to do a "net athletic profit" calculation, but the numbers were so dismal I didn't have the heart.
Memphis has done a good job developing fan interest in, and thus revenue from, its football program the last 5-6 years. If the basketball program is revived, revenues could surge even more.
|
|
07-07-2017 06:48 AM |
|
kb325
2nd String
Posts: 279
Joined: Apr 2015
Reputation: 9
I Root For: stAte
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
That whole list is apples and oranges if you ask me...one school has this donation, one school has this capitol project, one school plays off campus, etc...as an Arkansas State fan I'm really happy to be on that list...I think our athletic department is doing things right...but in a few years who knows where we'll show up on the list. If your team isn't on the list or is further down than you think it should be...I wouldn't sweat it. What matters to me is butts in seats and winning.
|
|
07-07-2017 07:08 AM |
|
CliftonAve
Heisman
Posts: 21,942
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1185
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 06:33 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote: (07-06-2017 09:34 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: (07-06-2017 06:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote: The AAC has 4 of the top 5, with UConn comfortably at #1, but surprisingly, to me, west coast schools are well-represented, with 5 of the top 11, moreso than the overall revenue figures would indicate. Reason? western schools don't use the truly massive $20m+ subsidies that the AAC schools use. IMO, this reveals the hidden strength of west coast schools in deriving athletic revenues.
This does not surprise me at all. Other than San Diego State and San Jose State, none of the MWC has competition from pro sports.
Also only 2 MWC schools are on the West Coast, so the MWC doesn't have the West Coast cultural indifference to sports. Even Fresno has more in common with Arkansas than it does with the beach communities and big cities on the West coast.
It appears as if state governments in the mountainous region are more willing to subsidize. How state governments support sports
That's because many of those schools are the flagship school in their respective states (same with UConn in the east). Most of the AAC, MAC, SBC and CUSA schools are the 3rd-6th priority in their own state.
|
|
07-07-2017 07:28 AM |
|
MinerInWisconsin
Hall of Famer
Posts: 10,701
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
It is curious, for all schools, what goes into the USAToday column titled "Other". That is the only column that went way up for ASU and it went up by about 15.7 million dollars. Don't know if there is a standardized reporting method for all schools but the "other" column for ASU is explained well by you.
|
|
07-07-2017 07:45 AM |
|
CougarRed
Hall of Famer
Posts: 11,450
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 429
I Root For: Houston
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 07:45 PM)arkstfan Wrote: Exactly. If you are spending $10 million in the year to build something because you have an extra $10 million from whatever source it goes on the books as $10 million more in expense and $10 million more in revenue.
The point is some schools report combined operational expenses/revenues with capital project expenses/revenues.
And some do not.
Which leads to faulty comparisons.
|
|
07-07-2017 08:00 AM |
|
Wolfman
All American
Posts: 4,470
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 184
I Root For: The Cartel
Location: Raleigh, NC
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
There is a "Methodology" link just below the list.
The numbers are what the school reported to the NCAA. The NCAA defines each category. I'm sure those definitions can be massaged but they should be fairly consistent school-to-school. Would a bank approve a loan based on these numbers...no way in Hades!
A couple of years ago Oregon had some big revenue numbers because of donations from Knight. Then Oklahoma State jumped up for a couple of years. Now A&M is spiking. You should see their numbers turn red when they start building/upgrading facilities.
|
|
07-07-2017 08:18 AM |
|
mturn017
ODU Homer
Posts: 16,810
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 08:00 AM)CougarRed Wrote: (07-06-2017 07:45 PM)arkstfan Wrote: Exactly. If you are spending $10 million in the year to build something because you have an extra $10 million from whatever source it goes on the books as $10 million more in expense and $10 million more in revenue.
The point is some schools report combined operational expenses/revenues with capital project expenses/revenues.
And some do not.
Which leads to faulty comparisons.
Starting in 2016 what all schools should be doing is reporting an amount received AND used during the year for athletics operations. So if you have a multi-year capital campaign then those amounts will likely never be included in your contributions. The "other" category includes a number of things including payments from third party (booster clubs) but there again it has to be used in the year.
|
|
07-07-2017 08:26 AM |
|
mturn017
ODU Homer
Posts: 16,810
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
Here are the NCAA Agreed Upon Procedures that Universities are supposed to be following. The Revenue and Expense categories are listed and explained in Appendix A&B. USA Today groups several categories together to get to the categories listed on the spreadsheet.
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/...170515.pdf
|
|
07-07-2017 08:33 AM |
|
arkstfan
Sorry folks
Posts: 25,918
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1003
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 10:27 PM)panama Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
Umm...two paragraphs equals fancy. But kudos for getting r done
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Well I could have stopped at "Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes." So nothing fancy about reporting a $5 million check.
|
|
07-07-2017 09:16 AM |
|
panama
Legend
Posts: 31,353
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 633
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 09:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:27 PM)panama Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
Umm...two paragraphs equals fancy. But kudos for getting r done
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Well I could have stopped at "Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes." So nothing fancy about reporting a $5 million check.
Joking
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
|
|
07-07-2017 09:16 AM |
|
arkstfan
Sorry folks
Posts: 25,918
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1003
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 07:45 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
It is curious, for all schools, what goes into the USAToday column titled "Other". That is the only column that went way up for ASU and it went up by about 15.7 million dollars. Don't know if there is a standardized reporting method for all schools but the "other" column for ASU is explained well by you.
That's just it, there is no standardized accounting.
I've gone round and round before over how AState has reported donations to USA Today. We don't report donations to our booster club unless the money passes through the athletic department. So if a coach receives a supplement, if it is paid directly to the coach from the booster club, not reported. Paid to the school and the school adds it to what comes from the line item state budget, it is reported. Video boards don't go on the athletic department books as inventory until the booster club paid for it. As a former booster club board of directors member I stayed puckered about getting that thing paid off and off our books because it wasn't covered by the university blanket insurance policy until we handed it over.
|
|
07-07-2017 09:22 AM |
|
arkstfan
Sorry folks
Posts: 25,918
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1003
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 08:00 AM)CougarRed Wrote: (07-06-2017 07:45 PM)arkstfan Wrote: Exactly. If you are spending $10 million in the year to build something because you have an extra $10 million from whatever source it goes on the books as $10 million more in expense and $10 million more in revenue.
The point is some schools report combined operational expenses/revenues with capital project expenses/revenues.
And some do not.
Which leads to faulty comparisons.
Based on my observation, I am pretty certain that schools are fairly uniform in adding capital expenditures with the payment mechanism being the determinant in whether it shows up in a single year or over 10 years.
AState reported the press box construction in a single year because the money all arrived up front. The indoor practice facility was built with bond debt so expense and revenue to pay are laid out over 10 years.
|
|
07-07-2017 09:25 AM |
|
mturn017
ODU Homer
Posts: 16,810
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1603
I Root For: Old Dominion
Location: Roanoke, VA
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 09:22 AM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-07-2017 07:45 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
It is curious, for all schools, what goes into the USAToday column titled "Other". That is the only column that went way up for ASU and it went up by about 15.7 million dollars. Don't know if there is a standardized reporting method for all schools but the "other" column for ASU is explained well by you.
That's just it, there is no standardized accounting.
I've gone round and round before over how AState has reported donations to USA Today. We don't report donations to our booster club unless the money passes through the athletic department. So if a coach receives a supplement, if it is paid directly to the coach from the booster club, not reported. Paid to the school and the school adds it to what comes from the line item state budget, it is reported. Video boards don't go on the athletic department books as inventory until the booster club paid for it. As a former booster club board of directors member I stayed puckered about getting that thing paid off and off our books because it wasn't covered by the university blanket insurance policy until we handed it over.
They've changed a lot of the standards so there is less ambiguity. There are still some differences in interpretations as far as what's University versus Athletics expense and how much general overhead should be applied to athletics, etc. But if your booster club is paying part of your coaches salary it absolutely should be reported. They've made that clear in the last couple of years. Look at the agreed upon procedures link I provided a couple posts ago.
|
|
07-07-2017 10:09 AM |
|
arkstfan
Sorry folks
Posts: 25,918
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1003
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 10:09 AM)mturn017 Wrote: (07-07-2017 09:22 AM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-07-2017 07:45 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
It is curious, for all schools, what goes into the USAToday column titled "Other". That is the only column that went way up for ASU and it went up by about 15.7 million dollars. Don't know if there is a standardized reporting method for all schools but the "other" column for ASU is explained well by you.
That's just it, there is no standardized accounting.
I've gone round and round before over how AState has reported donations to USA Today. We don't report donations to our booster club unless the money passes through the athletic department. So if a coach receives a supplement, if it is paid directly to the coach from the booster club, not reported. Paid to the school and the school adds it to what comes from the line item state budget, it is reported. Video boards don't go on the athletic department books as inventory until the booster club paid for it. As a former booster club board of directors member I stayed puckered about getting that thing paid off and off our books because it wasn't covered by the university blanket insurance policy until we handed it over.
They've changed a lot of the standards so there is less ambiguity. There are still some differences in interpretations as far as what's University versus Athletics expense and how much general overhead should be applied to athletics, etc. But if your booster club is paying part of your coaches salary it absolutely should be reported. They've made that clear in the last couple of years. Look at the agreed upon procedures link I provided a couple posts ago.
What is reported to the NCAA and USA Today hasn't historically been consistent. I would hope USA Today has caught on and just FOI's the report because then you get better consistency.
That's what the Kansas City Star did years ago with Kansas football. Finally sent an FOI for the I-A certification report due in February each year. What Kansas was reporting in football box scores was much higher than what they certified to the NCAA. If you look at the NCAA attendance report, that is box score numbers and not used to determine if a school is in compliance with FBS rules.
|
|
07-07-2017 11:40 AM |
|
Eldonabe
No More Wire Hangars!
Posts: 9,866
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 1311
I Root For: All but Uconn
Location: Van by the River
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 10:09 AM)mturn017 Wrote: (07-07-2017 09:22 AM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-07-2017 07:45 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote: (07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.
For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.
That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
It is curious, for all schools, what goes into the USAToday column titled "Other". That is the only column that went way up for ASU and it went up by about 15.7 million dollars. Don't know if there is a standardized reporting method for all schools but the "other" column for ASU is explained well by you.
That's just it, there is no standardized accounting.
I've gone round and round before over how AState has reported donations to USA Today. We don't report donations to our booster club unless the money passes through the athletic department. So if a coach receives a supplement, if it is paid directly to the coach from the booster club, not reported. Paid to the school and the school adds it to what comes from the line item state budget, it is reported. Video boards don't go on the athletic department books as inventory until the booster club paid for it. As a former booster club board of directors member I stayed puckered about getting that thing paid off and off our books because it wasn't covered by the university blanket insurance policy until we handed it over.
They've changed a lot of the standards so there is less ambiguity. There are still some differences in interpretations as far as what's University versus Athletics expense and how much general overhead should be applied to athletics, etc. But if your booster club is paying part of your coaches salary it absolutely should be reported. They've made that clear in the last couple of years. Look at the agreed upon procedures link I provided a couple posts ago.
C'mon Maaaaaan.... Less ambiguity?
I am an accountant by trade and I can tell you that I will make 1 + 1 equal whatever number you want me to make it equal..... These numbers are bull schidt.
|
|
07-07-2017 11:52 AM |
|
MplsBison
Banned
Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
Never ceases to amaze me how people want to pretend that college athletic departments should be treated like for-profit businesses, simply because it isn't a part of the core education mission.
Neither are the IT operations, which cost major universities tens of millions per year, perhaps if not more than that.
|
|
07-07-2017 12:02 PM |
|
panama
Legend
Posts: 31,353
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 633
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
|
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-07-2017 12:02 PM)MplsBison Wrote: Never ceases to amaze me how people want to pretend that college athletic departments should be treated like for-profit businesses, simply because it isn't a part of the core education mission.
Neither are the IT operations, which cost major universities tens of millions per year, perhaps if not more than that.
This
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
|
|
07-07-2017 12:07 PM |
|