G-5 reality

They are not counting student fees. Which is a source of income. The reason that UCF runs that deficit is because student fees make it up. We aren't actually losing that much money.

(11-25-2014 08:01 PM)MagicKnightmare Wrote:  They are not counting student fees. Which is a source of income. The reason that UCF runs that deficit is because student fees make it up. We aren't actually losing that much money.

Exactly and we can afford to keep them reasonable because of the student population we have.

(11-25-2014 08:01 PM)MagicKnightmare Wrote:  They are not counting student fees. Which is a source of income. The reason that UCF runs that deficit is because student fees make it up. We aren't actually losing that much money.

They're counting your total subsidy. Articles like this consider student fees to be a subsidy for some reason, but I guess it makes sense. Regardless, UCF still uses a bit under 3 million in school funds to break even. They are better off than most schools due to the student population. UAB, for example, is using about 13 million in school funds to break even and only have 5 million coming in from student fees. Memphis is using around 11 million from school funds to break even. Cinci used 21 million from 2012-2013 to break even and didn't charge student fees. Connecticut is using another 9 million in school funds, etc etc. Pretty much no one breaking even. Many P5 programs are running huge deficits as well.

For example, Rutgers had a gigantic deficit and used 37 million in school funds to break even in 2012-2013.

Same for USF and I belive we have talk of forming a new student fee to build an OCS. THeyve talked about needing about $150 million.

ECU has been around 11.6 or so million in student athletic fees. typically around 1/3 or so of the athletic dept's budget.

(11-25-2014 08:09 PM)Shrack Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 08:01 PM)MagicKnightmare Wrote:  They are not counting student fees. Which is a source of income. The reason that UCF runs that deficit is because student fees make it up. We aren't actually losing that much money.

They're counting your total subsidy. Articles like this consider student fees to be a subsidy for some reason, but I guess it makes sense. Regardless, UCF still uses a bit under 3 million in school funds to break even. They are better off than most schools due to the student population. UAB, for example, is using about 13 million in school funds to break even and only have 5 million coming in from student fees. Memphis is using around 11 million from school funds to break even. Cinci used 21 million from 2012-2013 to break even and didn't charge student fees. Connecticut is using another 9 million in school funds, etc etc. Pretty much no one breaking even. Many P5 programs are running huge deficits as well.

For example, Rutgers had a gigantic deficit and used 37 million in school funds to break even in 2012-2013.

I didn't check 100% of Shrack's numbers, but I did check about half of them and he's on target.

We all face challenges in obtaining a funding level to become competitive on a playing field that is uphill for all G5 conferences/universities.

I don't think that's a secret to anyone. We all do what we can do....and it's been discussed many times from many different angles.

We all need help.

well, its like, our money to waste. why do we gaf what he thinks.

(11-25-2014 08:09 PM)Shrack Wrote:  Articles like this consider student fees to be a subsidy for some reason,

...because they are subsidies. The student fee is mandatory, so it's very likely that Sorority Susie is funding a team that she frankly doesn't care that much about--if she's sort-of into college sports, she probably follows the P5 team her family roots for (that she couldn't get accepted to). Or if she's not, then she doesn't really give a damn about the Bearcats or Buckeyes or Bengals and she'd rather have the money.

You can argue that the subsidy is justified, you can argue that the subsidy is no-more-unfair than a lot of expenses that get bundled into tuition. You can say that the athletic subsidy was part of the deal when the student applied--no one forced them to go to Miami-O or Ohio U instead of Wright State. But you can't really argue that the Athletic (or Activities) Fee added to the tuition bill isn't a subsidy to the athletic department.

If the AAC had the same TV contract as the Big 12... I dont think any of us would be running a deficit or need student fees.

(11-25-2014 08:01 PM)MagicKnightmare Wrote:  They are not counting student fees. Which is a source of income. The reason that UCF runs that deficit is because student fees make it up. We aren't actually losing that much money.

It's a shame to have to rob Peter to pay Paul. The article has a good point.

(11-25-2014 09:31 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  If the AAC had the same TV contract as the Big 12... I dont think any of us would be running a deficit or need student fees.

Take away their big TV deals and most of them wouldn't need them either. They've got a lot more donors and fans than the G5's.

At the end of the day there's ZERO legitimate reason for them to spend the money they're spending. It's pretty ******* ridiculous when you think about it, especially considering it's more expensive to attend college than ever.

(11-25-2014 09:38 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 09:31 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  If the AAC had the same TV contract as the Big 12... I dont think any of us would be running a deficit or need student fees.

Take away their big TV deals and most of them wouldn't need them either. They've got a lot more donors and fans than the G5's.

I think youd be suprised at how many P5 teams also have student fees. Maryland was in the ACC and was drowning in debt. Thats why they made the move to the Big 10.

Maybe with the new CFP there will be enough money that they dont need it anymore.

(11-25-2014 09:37 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 08:01 PM)MagicKnightmare Wrote:  They are not counting student fees. Which is a source of income. The reason that UCF runs that deficit is because student fees make it up. We aren't actually losing that much money.

It's a shame to have to rob Peter to pay Paul. The article has a good point.

Not really the way I look at it. The way I see it, UCF knows that they have $23 million coming in for athletics from student fees. So that's $23 million more they can spend more elsewhere for facilities/recruiting/etc. It's part of the budget. They didn't start charging athletic fees because we were running a deficit. It looks like we are running a deficit because we charge athletic fees and invest in our program.

(11-25-2014 09:40 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 09:38 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 09:31 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  If the AAC had the same TV contract as the Big 12... I dont think any of us would be running a deficit or need student fees.

Take away their big TV deals and most of them wouldn't need them either. They've got a lot more donors and fans than the G5's.

I think youd be suprised at how many P5 teams also have student fees. Maryland was in the ACC and was drowning in debt. Thats why they made the move to the Big 10.

Maybe with the new CFP there will be enough money that they dont need it anymore.

They've got student fees but my point is that they don't NEED them to operate. There's no reason to milk everybody and their brother so they can pay a coach however many millions per year. If they've got it in the bank it's going to get spent. There's zero incentive for them not to spend as it's an insatiable appetite to keep consuming. Makes me want to vomit.

I'm pretty sure UH's number is not being reported completely accurately.

For example, the supposed $26.1M budget deficit includes $7.8M in student fees. We just had the student fee hearing. Our student fees for athletics have not risen in the last several years, and remain approximately $4.1M

The students did vote to fee themselves an addition $3.4M per year for athletic FACILITY construction. CAPEX projects are not operating deficits.

But by reading the CBS piece or the USA Today website, one would walk away thinking UH loses $26M a year on athletics on an operating basis.

(11-25-2014 09:49 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  I'm pretty sure UH's number is not being reported completely accurately.

For example, the supposed $26.1M budget deficit includes $7.8M in student fees. We just had the student fee hearing. Our student fees for athletics have not risen in the last several years, and remain approximately $4.1M

The students did vote to fee themselves an addition $3.4M per year for athletic FACILITY construction. CAPEX projects are not operating deficits.

But by reading the CBS piece or the USA Today website, one would walk away thinking UH loses $26M a year on athletics on an operating basis.

Explains 3 of the top 5--Houston, ODU and UMass were all building/rebuilding stadiums in 2012-13 (McGuirk is a dump, but it was still expensive.)

(11-25-2014 09:31 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  If the AAC had the same TV contract as the Big 12... I dont think any of us would be running a deficit or need student fees.

utk's athletic department was 200 million in debt. funny he didnt mention that in his article. uab football is like canadian football in alabama. people know it exists, its kinda an oddity, and no one cares unless there is absolutely nothing on tv but golden girl reruns.

(11-25-2014 09:49 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  I'm pretty sure UH's number is not being reported completely accurately.

For example, the supposed $26.1M budget deficit includes $7.8M in student fees. We just had the student fee hearing. Our student fees for athletics have not risen in the last several years, and remain approximately $4.1M

The students did vote to fee themselves an addition $3.4M per year for athletic FACILITY construction. CAPEX projects are not operating deficits.

But by reading the CBS piece or the USA Today website, one would walk away thinking UH loses $26M a year on athletics on an operating basis.

To "directionally" confirm what you're saying UH reported $4.4 in student fees in 2012 and $7.8 in student fees in 2013, which accounts for ~$3.4 that you reference is for facilities.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s.../finances/

That doesn't make UH any better or worse than the rest of us in the conference; we're all trying to pay for improved performance via whatever income stream we can find.

(11-25-2014 10:07 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 09:31 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  If the AAC had the same TV contract as the Big 12... I dont think any of us would be running a deficit or need student fees.

utk's athletic department was 200 million in debt. funny he didnt mention that in his article. uab football is like canadian football in alabama. people know it exists, its kinda an oddity, and no one cares unless there is absolutely nothing on tv but golden girl reruns.

It also isn't mentioned how The University of Alabama had 220 million in Athletic debt alone as of 2011. Nor does it mention that their campus owed only 200ish million just a decade ago, now it has over 1.2 billion in debt when it's yearly expenses/revenue are only 600-700 million.

UAB football has been held down since it's inception. Yes, support was terrible and there was a lot of apathy around the UAB football program, especially during the Callaway and McGee years. But I'm not sure how a school can generate a fanbase with someone else's foot on its throat. That's why all of these articles are popping up and all of these people are speaking out finally. Tim Brando just talked about it today in two different segments and our own coach spoke on how screwed up the situation is. CBS Sports has now done 2-3 articles on it. AL.com has written roughly 20 articles on the situation. The Alabama Board is denying UAB facility upgrades even when there are outside donors willing to pay for them. We are allowed to build a freaking soccer stadium when donations come in, but are not allowed to do anything for football, because you know, soccer is such a huge athletic revenue generator in Alabama. The freaking Mayor of Tuscaloosa just spoke out today for 20 minutes in support of UAB football. Heck, supposedly Nick Saban himself tried to speak out to a few of the trustees in favor of UAB over the Summer because Bill Clark asked him to when he was hired. Whatever his request was was allegedly shut down. Whether it was on Alabama playing UAB or UAB getting some small facility upgrades, who knows.

Just be happy Memphis isn't in the situation we UAB is in. I know we're an easy target to make fun of and it's probably hilarious to some people on the outside looking in, but you really wouldn't want the situation reversed.