You can just about rank-order the conferences in terms of overall strength by looking at the percentage of student/academic subsidies the athletic side is getting.

Number of schools with less than a 5% subsidy percentage:

SEC:...... 10
B1G:....... 8 (B1G has most schools with less than 2% subsidy rate)
Big 12:..... 5
PAC:....... 3
ACC: ...... 0 (most ACC schools have less than a 15% subsidy rate)

In contrast, the G5 are loaded with subsidies, robbing students and academics to Keep The Dream Alive. The best G5 school on the list is Boise, with a 26% subsidy rate. There are 50 schools, all P5, that have lower subsidy rates than them.

The best AAC school is UConn, which has a whopping 39% subsidy rate. My USF has an embarrassing 44% subsidy rate.

The amount of money has become obscene.

It's a big boy's game, clearly.

I am sure ECU fans are fond of this report saying they are in CUSA...

Also Louisville and Rutgers are in the AAC so I guess USA Today just copied and pasted from last years spreadsheet.

(05-27-2015 08:04 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  I am sure ECU fans are fond of this report saying they are in CUSA...

Also Louisville and Rutgers are in the AAC so I guess USA Today just copied and pasted from last years spreadsheet.

They are reporting figures from the 2013-2014 season when those schools were still in those conferences.

(05-27-2015 08:11 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 08:04 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  I am sure ECU fans are fond of this report saying they are in CUSA...

Also Louisville and Rutgers are in the AAC so I guess USA Today just copied and pasted from last years spreadsheet.

They are reporting figures from the 2013-2014 season when those schools were still in those conferences.

Wow it takes that long to get these numbers?

(05-27-2015 08:20 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 08:11 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 08:04 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  I am sure ECU fans are fond of this report saying they are in CUSA...

Also Louisville and Rutgers are in the AAC so I guess USA Today just copied and pasted from last years spreadsheet.

They are reporting figures from the 2013-2014 season when those schools were still in those conferences.

Wow it takes that long to get these numbers?

Probably because (1) The schools take a few months or more to generate their own financial reports, and (2) After that, it takes at least that long for USA Today and the people on this project at IU to get the information out of the schools via public-records requests.

(05-27-2015 03:34 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 02:17 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 02:07 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-26-2015 06:19 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Now, the schools from the FBS level that could move to the FBS if they open the doors for them.
James Madison

Not so fast on James Madison. The same Virginia law that limits ODU's subsidy to 45-55% would also apply to JMU if they moved up. They are currently at 81.62%. They have a long way to go to become compliant with the law if they want to move up.

James Madison CAA $43,767,486 $43,767,486 $35,725,049 81.62

Is the law that you can't do it for long term or does it mean that James Madison could do a fee for a few years to help transition the school to a higher level? Remember, moving FCS to FBS would help a school out in a long run, and I do think lawmakers would want to improve some of their schools' images.

The law is for the long term and JMU is not compliant with the 70% or less FCS requirement either. So they have to improve fund raising just to stay in FCS. However they have a long time to get compliant. The laws takes effect on July 1st 2016 and they have 5 years and if they can't do it in 5 years they can request another 5. What wasn't mentioned in the USA today article is that there will be a board that any Virginia school has to request permission to move up in any sport. So it's no longer up to the school alone if they want to make a jump. If JMU wants to move up to FBS they better to it before the law goes into effect.

God, I wish people would do research.

From the DNR article on tuition increase at JMU ...

"The university also has until the next budget cycle to implement a new state requirement for athletics funding, which was signed into law last month.

As a school with a Division I-AA football program, the cost of JMU athletics that can be subsidized by student fees will be capped at 70 percent.

The Daily News-Record previously reported that more than 78 percent of JMU’s athletic revenues came from student fees this school year, but King said not all that money must be included in the subsidy.

The new law makes exceptions for athletics-related debt service costs, agency fees required for all auxiliary services, and “spirit groups” costs, such as the JMU Marching Royal Dukes band and cheerleaders.

King said these expenditures do not need to be included in the subsidized percentage because they are either state-mandated expenditures or, in the case of spirit groups, serve nonathletic purposes in addition to their sports-related duties.

With these exclusions, student fees will make up 60 percent of athletics revenue, according to the board’s meeting documents. JMU had 499 student athletes this school year, about 2.5 percent of the total student body."

(05-26-2015 04:04 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...fi.../27971457/
A couple of sad quotes from the article:

Quote:By the NCAA's benchmark for self-sufficiency, just 24 of 230 public schools in Division I stand on their own...

Quote:By NCAA definition, self sufficiency means an athletic department's generated operating revenues — not counting money from student fees, university funding or direct government support — are at least equal to its total operating expenses, which is legalese for taking in more money than you spend.
Oregon led the nation with $196 million total operating revenue and an $83.5 million difference between its generated revenue and its total operating expense of $110.4 million. However, the school reported that its revenue included in-kind facility gifts of $95 million — the value a football training facility funded primarily by Nike co-founder Phil Knight and his wife.
The other 23 schools meeting this standard are all from the Southeastern, Big Ten, Pac-12 and Big 12 conferences, including Texas, which led the nation in total operating expense at $154.1 million and reported transferring another $9.7 million back to the university. Texas' total operating revenue was second to Oregon's at $161 million.
The Atlantic Coast Conference, the other member of the Power Five, did not have any schools meeting the NCAA benchmark, though North Carolina State came close, with a deficit of just more than $165,000.

Quote:The deficits get smaller and the number of self-sufficient schools gets larger if viewed another way. While athletics departments get money from student fees, university funds and government support, they also send money to their schools through payments for scholarships and facilities and through transfers like Texas'.
When those amounts are balanced, USA TODAY Sports found, all 50 of the public schools that were in a Power Five conference in 2013-14 were self-sufficient. But only three Bowl Subdivision schools outside the Power Five and two non-FBS schools were self-sufficient.

And for the non-P5, it's only going to get worse from here.

Really?

Between 2013 and 2014 AState increased its budget 25% from $16 million to $20 million while reducing subsidy from 57% to 52%.

(05-27-2015 11:19 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 08:20 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 08:11 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 08:04 AM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  I am sure ECU fans are fond of this report saying they are in CUSA...

Also Louisville and Rutgers are in the AAC so I guess USA Today just copied and pasted from last years spreadsheet.

They are reporting figures from the 2013-2014 season when those schools were still in those conferences.

Wow it takes that long to get these numbers?

Probably because (1) The schools take a few months or more to generate their own financial reports, and (2) After that, it takes at least that long for USA Today and the people on this project at IU to get the information out of the schools via public-records requests.

Exactly correct. Most schools ended that fiscal year June 30, 2014, so 11 months after the fact isn't that long. AState's booster club doesn't file it's tax return as a charitable entity until six months after the close of the fiscal year.

(05-27-2015 11:33 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 03:34 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 02:17 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 02:07 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(05-26-2015 06:19 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Now, the schools from the FBS level that could move to the FBS if they open the doors for them.
James Madison

Not so fast on James Madison. The same Virginia law that limits ODU's subsidy to 45-55% would also apply to JMU if they moved up. They are currently at 81.62%. They have a long way to go to become compliant with the law if they want to move up.

James Madison CAA $43,767,486 $43,767,486 $35,725,049 81.62

Is the law that you can't do it for long term or does it mean that James Madison could do a fee for a few years to help transition the school to a higher level? Remember, moving FCS to FBS would help a school out in a long run, and I do think lawmakers would want to improve some of their schools' images.

The law is for the long term and JMU is not compliant with the 70% or less FCS requirement either. So they have to improve fund raising just to stay in FCS. However they have a long time to get compliant. The laws takes effect on July 1st 2016 and they have 5 years and if they can't do it in 5 years they can request another 5. What wasn't mentioned in the USA today article is that there will be a board that any Virginia school has to request permission to move up in any sport. So it's no longer up to the school alone if they want to make a jump. If JMU wants to move up to FBS they better to it before the law goes into effect.

God, I wish people would do research.

From the DNR article on tuition increase at JMU ...

"The university also has until the next budget cycle to implement a new state requirement for athletics funding, which was signed into law last month.

As a school with a Division I-AA football program, the cost of JMU athletics that can be subsidized by student fees will be capped at 70 percent.

The Daily News-Record previously reported that more than 78 percent of JMU’s athletic revenues came from student fees this school year, but King said not all that money must be included in the subsidy.

The new law makes exceptions for athletics-related debt service costs, agency fees required for all auxiliary services, and “spirit groups” costs, such as the JMU Marching Royal Dukes band and cheerleaders.

King said these expenditures do not need to be included in the subsidized percentage because they are either state-mandated expenditures or, in the case of spirit groups, serve nonathletic purposes in addition to their sports-related duties.

With these exclusions, student fees will make up 60 percent of athletics revenue, according to the board’s meeting documents. JMU had 499 student athletes this school year, about 2.5 percent of the total student body."

ODU is in the same boat with their subsidy standing with those subtractable costs. However, given Wood's willingness to promote how much more they need to fundraise in order to be in "good standing", they are clearly using the new law in the AD and ODAF to elicit more donations. Heck, if you look at the ODAF Twitter today, it even links the article and prompts more giving.

(05-27-2015 12:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-26-2015 04:04 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...fi.../27971457/
A couple of sad quotes from the article:

Quote:By the NCAA's benchmark for self-sufficiency, just 24 of 230 public schools in Division I stand on their own...

Quote:By NCAA definition, self sufficiency means an athletic department's generated operating revenues — not counting money from student fees, university funding or direct government support — are at least equal to its total operating expenses, which is legalese for taking in more money than you spend.
Oregon led the nation with $196 million total operating revenue and an $83.5 million difference between its generated revenue and its total operating expense of $110.4 million. However, the school reported that its revenue included in-kind facility gifts of $95 million — the value a football training facility funded primarily by Nike co-founder Phil Knight and his wife.
The other 23 schools meeting this standard are all from the Southeastern, Big Ten, Pac-12 and Big 12 conferences, including Texas, which led the nation in total operating expense at $154.1 million and reported transferring another $9.7 million back to the university. Texas' total operating revenue was second to Oregon's at $161 million.
The Atlantic Coast Conference, the other member of the Power Five, did not have any schools meeting the NCAA benchmark, though North Carolina State came close, with a deficit of just more than $165,000.

Quote:The deficits get smaller and the number of self-sufficient schools gets larger if viewed another way. While athletics departments get money from student fees, university funds and government support, they also send money to their schools through payments for scholarships and facilities and through transfers like Texas'.
When those amounts are balanced, USA TODAY Sports found, all 50 of the public schools that were in a Power Five conference in 2013-14 were self-sufficient. But only three Bowl Subdivision schools outside the Power Five and two non-FBS schools were self-sufficient.

And for the non-P5, it's only going to get worse from here.

Really?

Between 2013 and 2014 AState increased its budget 25% from $16 million to $20 million while reducing subsidy from 57% to 52%.

That's still far from breaking even. Add to that unlimited meals and FCoA and it'll be even harder.

(05-27-2015 07:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  You can just about rank-order the conferences in terms of overall strength by looking at the percentage of student/academic subsidies the athletic side is getting.

Number of schools with less than a 5% subsidy percentage:

SEC:...... 10
B1G:....... 8 (B1G has most schools with less than 2% subsidy rate)
Big 12:..... 5
PAC:....... 3
ACC: ...... 0 (most ACC schools have less than a 15% subsidy rate)

In contrast, the G5 are loaded with subsidies, robbing students and academics to Keep The Dream Alive. The best G5 school on the list is Boise, with a 26% subsidy rate. There are 50 schools, all P5, that have lower subsidy rates than them.

The best AAC school is UConn, which has a whopping 39% subsidy rate. My USF has an embarrassing 44% subsidy rate.

G5 subsidies are high however,

"I think it's worth it," said Drew Harmon of White Oak, Ohio, a fifth-year finance and entrepreneurship major at UC and chairman of a group that allocates the student fees.

UC students pay $168.02 per semester on their student fee specifically for athletics; the university pays about $15 million more in general funds.

"I've been here for five years, and the more athletics is succeeding, the more the UC community seems like a family," Harmon said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/natio...s/2814455/

That is not robbery.

(05-27-2015 01:54 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 12:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-26-2015 04:04 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...fi.../27971457/
A couple of sad quotes from the article:

Quote:By the NCAA's benchmark for self-sufficiency, just 24 of 230 public schools in Division I stand on their own...

Quote:By NCAA definition, self sufficiency means an athletic department's generated operating revenues — not counting money from student fees, university funding or direct government support — are at least equal to its total operating expenses, which is legalese for taking in more money than you spend.
Oregon led the nation with $196 million total operating revenue and an $83.5 million difference between its generated revenue and its total operating expense of $110.4 million. However, the school reported that its revenue included in-kind facility gifts of $95 million — the value a football training facility funded primarily by Nike co-founder Phil Knight and his wife.
The other 23 schools meeting this standard are all from the Southeastern, Big Ten, Pac-12 and Big 12 conferences, including Texas, which led the nation in total operating expense at $154.1 million and reported transferring another $9.7 million back to the university. Texas' total operating revenue was second to Oregon's at $161 million.
The Atlantic Coast Conference, the other member of the Power Five, did not have any schools meeting the NCAA benchmark, though North Carolina State came close, with a deficit of just more than $165,000.

Quote:The deficits get smaller and the number of self-sufficient schools gets larger if viewed another way. While athletics departments get money from student fees, university funds and government support, they also send money to their schools through payments for scholarships and facilities and through transfers like Texas'.
When those amounts are balanced, USA TODAY Sports found, all 50 of the public schools that were in a Power Five conference in 2013-14 were self-sufficient. But only three Bowl Subdivision schools outside the Power Five and two non-FBS schools were self-sufficient.

And for the non-P5, it's only going to get worse from here.

Really?

Between 2013 and 2014 AState increased its budget 25% from $16 million to $20 million while reducing subsidy from 57% to 52%.

That's still far from breaking even. Add to that unlimited meals and FCoA and it'll be even harder.

Who said anything about breaking even? This ain't business this is college athletics, breaking even is still a relatively new concept in intercollegiate major college football.

The numbers are from 7/1/2013 to 6/30/2014.

That's important to note while you worry about full cost of attendance and unlimited meals.

At the higher end for a G5 we are talking one million dollars.

BIG DEAL.

Why? Because FY 7/1/2014 to 6/30/2015 a new revenue stream came online. The CFP. The distribution essentially covers full cost and unlimited meals.

Or as they say in government accounting... it's revenue neutral.

Do I think schools can sustain subsidies greater than 70% for an extended time? No I think that is unlikely. Can they sustain 60% to 69% more likely than not. Virginia has instructed ODU and anyone who follows them into the G5 ranks to keep at 55% or less and that's likely quite sustainable. Get it to 50% and the chances of being in a crunch are pretty slim.

Just for kicks, here are the Big East numbers as far as athletic department budget (all private schools):

St. John's was $37,650,000. ($8.25 million for men's basketball)
Villanova was $34,850,000. ($7.3 million for men's basketball)
Georgetown was $34,500,000. ($10.3 million for men's basketball)
Marquette was $29,700,000. ($10.5 million for men's basketball)
Providence was $26,040,000. ($7.1 million for men's basketball)
DePaul was $25,000,000. ($6.3 million for men's basketball)
Seton Hall was $21,700,000. ($6.4 million for men's basketball)
Creighton was $18,3000,000. ($6.24 million for men's basketball)
Butler was $17,570,000. ($4.07 million for men's basketball)
Xavier was $16,550,000. ($5.2 million for men's basketball)

No subsidies.

(05-27-2015 02:29 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 07:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  You can just about rank-order the conferences in terms of overall strength by looking at the percentage of student/academic subsidies the athletic side is getting.

Number of schools with less than a 5% subsidy percentage:

SEC:...... 10
B1G:....... 8 (B1G has most schools with less than 2% subsidy rate)
Big 12:..... 5
PAC:....... 3
ACC: ...... 0 (most ACC schools have less than a 15% subsidy rate)

In contrast, the G5 are loaded with subsidies, robbing students and academics to Keep The Dream Alive. The best G5 school on the list is Boise, with a 26% subsidy rate. There are 50 schools, all P5, that have lower subsidy rates than them.

The best AAC school is UConn, which has a whopping 39% subsidy rate. My USF has an embarrassing 44% subsidy rate.

G5 subsidies are high however,

"I think it's worth it," said Drew Harmon of White Oak, Ohio, a fifth-year finance and entrepreneurship major at UC and chairman of a group that allocates the student fees.

UC students pay $168.02 per semester on their student fee specifically for athletics; the university pays about $15 million more in general funds.

"I've been here for five years, and the more athletics is succeeding, the more the UC community seems like a family," Harmon said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/natio...s/2814455/

That is not robbery.

That's one person's opinion. Also, my "robbery" claim is on principle, more than whether a particular student thinks the fun of athletics is worth paying $125 a semester for: It is just plain wrong for academics to subsidize athletics. The only valid relationship between them is for athletics to subsidize academics.

Otherwise, college athletics should be a club-level activity.

(05-27-2015 02:44 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 01:54 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 12:06 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-26-2015 04:04 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...fi.../27971457/
A couple of sad quotes from the article:

Quote:By the NCAA's benchmark for self-sufficiency, just 24 of 230 public schools in Division I stand on their own...

Quote:By NCAA definition, self sufficiency means an athletic department's generated operating revenues — not counting money from student fees, university funding or direct government support — are at least equal to its total operating expenses, which is legalese for taking in more money than you spend.
Oregon led the nation with $196 million total operating revenue and an $83.5 million difference between its generated revenue and its total operating expense of $110.4 million. However, the school reported that its revenue included in-kind facility gifts of $95 million — the value a football training facility funded primarily by Nike co-founder Phil Knight and his wife.
The other 23 schools meeting this standard are all from the Southeastern, Big Ten, Pac-12 and Big 12 conferences, including Texas, which led the nation in total operating expense at $154.1 million and reported transferring another $9.7 million back to the university. Texas' total operating revenue was second to Oregon's at $161 million.
The Atlantic Coast Conference, the other member of the Power Five, did not have any schools meeting the NCAA benchmark, though North Carolina State came close, with a deficit of just more than $165,000.

Quote:The deficits get smaller and the number of self-sufficient schools gets larger if viewed another way. While athletics departments get money from student fees, university funds and government support, they also send money to their schools through payments for scholarships and facilities and through transfers like Texas'.
When those amounts are balanced, USA TODAY Sports found, all 50 of the public schools that were in a Power Five conference in 2013-14 were self-sufficient. But only three Bowl Subdivision schools outside the Power Five and two non-FBS schools were self-sufficient.

And for the non-P5, it's only going to get worse from here.

Really?

Between 2013 and 2014 AState increased its budget 25% from $16 million to $20 million while reducing subsidy from 57% to 52%.

That's still far from breaking even. Add to that unlimited meals and FCoA and it'll be even harder.

Who said anything about breaking even? This ain't business this is college athletics, breaking even is still a relatively new concept in intercollegiate major college football.

The numbers are from 7/1/2013 to 6/30/2014.

That's important to note while you worry about full cost of attendance and unlimited meals.

At the higher end for a G5 we are talking one million dollars.

BIG DEAL.

Why? Because FY 7/1/2014 to 6/30/2015 a new revenue stream came online. The CFP. The distribution essentially covers full cost and unlimited meals.
Or as they say in government accounting... it's revenue neutral.

Do I think schools can sustain subsidies greater than 70% for an extended time? No I think that is unlikely. Can they sustain 60% to 69% more likely than not. Virginia has instructed ODU and anyone who follows them into the G5 ranks to keep at 55% or less and that's likely quite sustainable. Get it to 50% and the chances of being in a crunch are pretty slim.

The bold is not true for the AAC. They actually took a a big revenue drop from the BCS.

(05-28-2015 04:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 02:29 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 07:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  You can just about rank-order the conferences in terms of overall strength by looking at the percentage of student/academic subsidies the athletic side is getting.

Number of schools with less than a 5% subsidy percentage:

SEC:...... 10
B1G:....... 8 (B1G has most schools with less than 2% subsidy rate)
Big 12:..... 5
PAC:....... 3
ACC: ...... 0 (most ACC schools have less than a 15% subsidy rate)

In contrast, the G5 are loaded with subsidies, robbing students and academics to Keep The Dream Alive. The best G5 school on the list is Boise, with a 26% subsidy rate. There are 50 schools, all P5, that have lower subsidy rates than them.

The best AAC school is UConn, which has a whopping 39% subsidy rate. My USF has an embarrassing 44% subsidy rate.

G5 subsidies are high however,

"I think it's worth it," said Drew Harmon of White Oak, Ohio, a fifth-year finance and entrepreneurship major at UC and chairman of a group that allocates the student fees.

UC students pay $168.02 per semester on their student fee specifically for athletics; the university pays about $15 million more in general funds.

"I've been here for five years, and the more athletics is succeeding, the more the UC community seems like a family," Harmon said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/natio...s/2814455/

That is not robbery.

That's one person's opinion. Also, my "robbery" claim is on principle, more than whether a particular student thinks the fun of athletics is worth paying $125 a semester for: It is just plain wrong for academics to subsidize athletics. The only valid relationship between them is for athletics to subsidize academics.

Otherwise, college athletics should be a club-level activity.

Academics has subsidized athletics since the start of intercollegiate athletics and most schools subsidize their club sports as well.

(05-27-2015 10:55 PM)Jet915 Wrote:  Just for kicks, here are the Big East numbers as far as athletic department budget (all private schools):

St. John's was $37,650,000. ($8.25 million for men's basketball)
Villanova was $34,850,000. ($7.3 million for men's basketball)
Georgetown was $34,500,000. ($10.3 million for men's basketball)
Marquette was $29,700,000. ($10.5 million for men's basketball)
Providence was $26,040,000. ($7.1 million for men's basketball)
DePaul was $25,000,000. ($6.3 million for men's basketball)
Seton Hall was $21,700,000. ($6.4 million for men's basketball)
Creighton was $18,3000,000. ($6.24 million for men's basketball)
Butler was $17,570,000. ($4.07 million for men's basketball)
Xavier was $16,550,000. ($5.2 million for men's basketball)

No subsidies.

Where do those numbers come from? And do they account for the new FS1 TV deal for all schools?

I'm sure its just a big coincidence but it almost looks as if the schools from the 5 FBS conferences that got an additional $250,000,000 in revenue share from the CFP tend to have higher revenue than the teams from the 5 conferences that didn't.

(05-28-2015 08:31 AM)Eichorst Wrote:  

(05-27-2015 10:55 PM)Jet915 Wrote:  Just for kicks, here are the Big East numbers as far as athletic department budget (all private schools):

St. John's was $37,650,000. ($8.25 million for men's basketball)
Villanova was $34,850,000. ($7.3 million for men's basketball)
Georgetown was $34,500,000. ($10.3 million for men's basketball)
Marquette was $29,700,000. ($10.5 million for men's basketball)
Providence was $26,040,000. ($7.1 million for men's basketball)
DePaul was $25,000,000. ($6.3 million for men's basketball)
Seton Hall was $21,700,000. ($6.4 million for men's basketball)
Creighton was $18,3000,000. ($6.24 million for men's basketball)
Butler was $17,570,000. ($4.07 million for men's basketball)
Xavier was $16,550,000. ($5.2 million for men's basketball)

No subsidies.

Where do those numbers come from? And do they account for the new FS1 TV deal for all schools?

These numbers are the budgets and not the revenue so no idea whether the schools make money or not.