(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:34 PM)panama Wrote:  Your postings are though.

Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:34 PM)panama Wrote:  Your postings are though.

Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

(02-25-2017 12:51 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:34 PM)panama Wrote:  Your postings are though.

Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

Who cares. It's a credit one place and a debit elsewhere on your university operating budget of which they have plenty of revenue. If not they wouldn't be doing it. So what is your suggestion? They should drop to FCS? Join the MAC? Drop football? On your expert say so? Sit down Mr -21. Go back to the easy life of P5 football rooting and leave the real work to adults.

(02-25-2017 01:09 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:51 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:34 PM)panama Wrote:  Your postings are though.

Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

Who cares. It's a credit one place and a debit elsewhere on your university operating budget of which they have plenty of revenue. If not they wouldn't be doing it. So what is your suggestion? They should drop to FCS? Join the MAC? Drop football? On your expert say so? Sit down Mr -21. Go back to the easy life of P5 football rooting and leave the real work to adults.

That's the best you can do when faced with a decade of AD budgets which show an increasing dependence on taxpayers to operate the AD? LOL, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

This is a public forum. You don't see to understand that concept. NOr do you understand that the AC cant' just keep taking from other places to increase the budget at donations and ticket sales are stagnant.

I say wait 2 years for the MAC and if that doesn't happen drop to FCS which is where the AD belongs due to support.

I am not more of an expert than you are and no less of an adult. Those are just lame attempts by you to insult me. Great job, lol.

I have no problem with your opinion, you simply can't handle mine which is backed up with facts. That's why you are so upset and started this fight becasue you know I'm right and it upsets you Anyone can look at your posts and see what you were trying to do today. Try to stay on topic and control your emotions.

(02-25-2017 01:16 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:09 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:51 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

Who cares. It's a credit one place and a debit elsewhere on your university operating budget of which they have plenty of revenue. If not they wouldn't be doing it. So what is your suggestion? They should drop to FCS? Join the MAC? Drop football? On your expert say so? Sit down Mr -21. Go back to the easy life of P5 football rooting and leave the real work to adults.

That's the best you can do when faced with a decade of AD budgets which show an increasing dependence on taxpayers to operate the AD? LOL, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

This is a public forum. You don't see to understand that concept. NOr do you understand that the AC cant' just keep taking from other places to increase the budget at donations and ticket sales are stagnant.

I say wait 2 years for the MAC and if that doesn't happen drop to FCS which is where the AD belongs due to support.

I am not more of an expert than you are and no less of an adult. Those are just lame attempts by you to insult me. Great job, lol.

I have no problem with your opinion, you simply can't handle mine which is backed up with facts. That's why you are so upset and started this fight becasue you know I'm right and it upsets you Anyone can look at your posts and see what you were trying to do today. Try to stay on topic and control your emotions.

Your opinion is based on being a P5 fan. You're engorged and fat with TV money and not remembering that your own program was built the same way before TV showed up with bags of money.
Where are taxpayers paying for UMass football? Student Fees? Or a check from the general fund? As I said, their systems annual budget is $3.2B. The subsidy you refer to is minuscule. And if it were an issue someone in the Mass state house would be screaming. The benefits that UMass receives by staying FBS far outweigh any perceived down side. College athletics is part of the marketing of the university. And the ROI is much higher than any advertising campaign possible from the academic side.

(02-25-2017 01:29 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:16 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:09 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:51 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

Who cares. It's a credit one place and a debit elsewhere on your university operating budget of which they have plenty of revenue. If not they wouldn't be doing it. So what is your suggestion? They should drop to FCS? Join the MAC? Drop football? On your expert say so? Sit down Mr -21. Go back to the easy life of P5 football rooting and leave the real work to adults.

That's the best you can do when faced with a decade of AD budgets which show an increasing dependence on taxpayers to operate the AD? LOL, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

This is a public forum. You don't see to understand that concept. NOr do you understand that the AC cant' just keep taking from other places to increase the budget at donations and ticket sales are stagnant.

I say wait 2 years for the MAC and if that doesn't happen drop to FCS which is where the AD belongs due to support.

I am not more of an expert than you are and no less of an adult. Those are just lame attempts by you to insult me. Great job, lol.

I have no problem with your opinion, you simply can't handle mine which is backed up with facts. That's why you are so upset and started this fight becasue you know I'm right and it upsets you Anyone can look at your posts and see what you were trying to do today. Try to stay on topic and control your emotions.

Your opinion is based on being a P5 fan. You're engorged and fat with TV money and not remembering that your own program was built the same way before TV showed up with bags of money.
Where are taxpayers paying for UMass football? Student Fees? Or a check from the general fund? As I said, their systems annual budget is $3.2B. The subsidy you refer to is minuscule. And if it were an issue someone in the Mass state house would be screaming. The benefits that UMass receives by staying FBS far outweigh any perceived down side. College athletics is part of the marketing of the university. And the ROI is much higher than any advertising campaign possible from the academic side.

This has nothing to do with p-5, that's just your insecurity talking. Most games I attend are d-2. HAs zero to do with OU, that is just some weird fantasy you came up with becasue of your insecurities. So predictable.

All schools have large budgets, but that has zero bearing on AD budgets. Neither do endowments.

I personally see little to no benefits to playing FBS for UMAss. It hasn't increased ticket sales or donations. Where do you see the benefit looking at those budget numbers? Are enrollment/application numbers up since the change?

Where do you think the sudsidies come from?

(02-25-2017 01:36 PM)panama Wrote:  Where do you think the sudsidies come from?

Who cares, just take it from the academic side and let the students and taxpayers pay for it. LOL.

You are beyond clueless when it comes to this judging by your answers.

You came here to start a fight. Got proven wrong by loads of financial data, and now are resorting to overall school budget numbers to claim it's no big deal to pay for the AD with those funds. Essentially you lost this debate badly and now are down to the last pathetic insults.

It's clear that before this you had never even looked at the UMass budget and have done nothing but make a fool of yourself since joining the conversation only providing one piece of information, the overall school budget, to justify your claims of the AD funding being "no big deal"

All that while I showed you the reason for the budget increase, and lack of improvement in ticket sales and donations since joining FBS as well as not meeting the minimum attendance requirements.

You have 2 more years, if you can't get a MAC date to prom (FBS) it's over. Play all the other New England flagships in FCS and stop being a burden.

You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

(02-25-2017 12:51 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:34 PM)panama Wrote:  Your postings are though.

Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

If you compare 2009 with 2015 in ticket sales and in licensing they are essentially flat with UMass.

The big jump is the use of institutional funds. There is inflation from 2009 to 2015 with university operating budgets but I doubt the university operating budget increased 75% in six years. Probably closer to 25%.

UMass FBS is clearly a project they are hoping has payoff. Its a tough region to build a program in.

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

The person here who doesn't' get AD budgets is you. I am quite familiar with AD budgets of various schools, you OTOH first looked at the UMAss AD budget today. LOL

This is just your final lame attempt to make this about me, which it' isn't. But nice try

You have made a fool of yourself here. Try to stay on subject next time. Congrats and have a great weekend.

(02-25-2017 01:55 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:51 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:34 PM)panama Wrote:  Your postings are though.

Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

If you compare 2009 with 2015 in ticket sales and in licensing they are essentially flat with UMass.

The big jump is the use of institutional funds. There is inflation from 2009 to 2015 with university operating budgets but I doubt the university operating budget increased 75% in six years. Probably closer to 25%.

UMass FBS is clearly a project they are hoping has payoff. Its a tough region to build a program in.

But their operating budget is $3.2B.

Hence the reason nobody cares. The whole subsidy issue is a ruse. Any FBS school has an operating budget of at least half a billion dollars and nobody is subsidizing more than $20M on a continual basis. Add to that that any shortfall usually from Olympic sports and not football.

(02-25-2017 01:55 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:51 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:45 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:37 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 12:34 PM)panama Wrote:  Your postings are though.

Everything in my post is a fact. If ou dispute any numbers I will give you a link.

The joke here is you trolling. Keep up the fine work.

Their annual operation budget is $3.2B. They can subsiduze $32M and it would be 1% of their budget. Why are so concerned with UMass anyway?

LOL. As usual you are clueless. Every time a broke AD is brought up the reaction is talk academics, endowment, or now operating budget for the school. None of which have anything to do with the AD budget or ability to operate a FBS football program. It's just a sorry arse attempt to defelct the reality of the situation.

Lets talk real numbers shall we, Facts.

Wyoming has roughly the same AD budget but only requires half the subsidy. That means wyoming is able to raise more money as an AD through things like ticket sales and donations. The last nuber is subsidy. That is where the UMAss AD gets 80%of its' income.

71 Massachusetts A-10 $36,512,437 $36,897,375 $28,681,769 78.55
72 Wyoming Mt. West $35,260,511 $33,364,169 $15,395,379 43.66

Massachusetts
CONFERENCE: A-10

YEAR TICKET SALES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHTS / LICENSING STUDENT FEES SCHOOL FUNDS OTHER TOTAL REVENUES
2015 $1,643,397 $1,371,144 $2,566,830 $8,151,071 $20,530,698 $2,249,297 $36,512,437
2014 $1,695,134 $1,579,380 $1,711,809 $8,081,072 $18,344,057 $2,464,466 $33,875,918
2013 $1,413,936 $841,873 $1,729,462 $8,004,252 $16,350,175 $1,720,937 $30,060,635
2012 $1,160,807 $1,174,767 $1,787,962 $7,986,581 $16,389,092 $1,263,008 $29,762,217
2011 $1,290,143 $656,374 $2,071,154 $7,858,242 $14,185,734 $1,186,630 $27,248,277
2010 $1,246,446 $615,212 $2,028,721 $7,655,562 $12,519,657 $1,092,374 $25,157,972
2009 $1,543,216 $728,547 $1,958,969 $7,523,706 $12,458,449 $1,035,586 $25,248,473
2008 $1,477,290 $917,399 $2,067,241 $7,247,226 $12,407,669 $1,103,813 $25,220,638
2007 $1,400,854 $1,030,645 $2,051,253 $7,110,508 $8,798,995 $761,606 $21,153,861
2006 $1,084,246 $719,429 $1,973,277 $6,910,727 $8,448,848 $745,163 $19,881,690
2005 $1,032,637 $705,500 $1,625,442 $6,844,792 $8,391,074 $745,146 $19,344,591

If you compare 2009 with 2015 in ticket sales and in licensing they are essentially flat with UMass.

The big jump is the use of institutional funds. There is inflation from 2009 to 2015 with university operating budgets but I doubt the university operating budget increased 75% in six years. Probably closer to 25%.

UMass FBS is clearly a project they are hoping has payoff. Its a tough region to build a program in.

That's what I see as well.

(02-25-2017 01:59 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

The person here who doesn't' get AD budgets is you. I am quite familiar with AD budgets of various schools, you OTOH first looked at the UMAss AD budget today. LOL

This is just your final lame attempt to make this about me, which it' isn't. But nice try

You have made a fool of yourself here. Try to stay on subject next time. Congrats and have a great weekend.

Should I rephrase the question? Because you did not answer it nor the prior one?

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

They are taking funds that could be used on a new research park and instead investing it into FBS football.

(02-25-2017 02:01 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:59 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

The person here who doesn't' get AD budgets is you. I am quite familiar with AD budgets of various schools, you OTOH first looked at the UMAss AD budget today. LOL

This is just your final lame attempt to make this about me, which it' isn't. But nice try

You have made a fool of yourself here. Try to stay on subject next time. Congrats and have a great weekend.

Should I rephrase the question? Because you did not answer it nor the prior one?

The data speaks for itself.

Your idea that AD's can just take whatever is necessary from the big operating budget is not even worth debating because its' that stupid.

But by all means run with it. It's entertaining for the rest of us.

(02-25-2017 02:03 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

They are taking funds that could be used on a new research park and instead investing it into FBS football.

That's like saying you make $100k a year and someone says you should not spent $1000 to add a deck to your house because you could be repairing your driveway. Maybe I can do both because I make $100k.

(02-25-2017 02:04 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 02:01 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:59 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

The person here who doesn't' get AD budgets is you. I am quite familiar with AD budgets of various schools, you OTOH first looked at the UMAss AD budget today. LOL

This is just your final lame attempt to make this about me, which it' isn't. But nice try

You have made a fool of yourself here. Try to stay on subject next time. Congrats and have a great weekend.

Should I rephrase the question? Because you did not answer it nor the prior one?

The data speaks for itself.

Your idea that AD's can just take whatever is necessary from the big operating budget is not even worth debating because its' that stupid.

But by all means run with it. It's entertaining for the rest of us.

They are not taking anything. Someone is deciding that that very small amount is worth paying to have Division I and FBS athletics. That someone or someones are the President, Chancellor and Trusetees. And to paraphrase Fermi...if this is bad where is the anger?

(02-25-2017 02:05 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 02:03 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

They are taking funds that could be used on a new research park and instead investing it into FBS football.

That's like saying you make $100k a year and someone says you should not spent $1000 to add a deck to your house because you could be repairing your driveway. Maybe I can do both because I make $100k.

It's more like spending $1000 on a deck with the hopes of making your property more valuable or spending $1000 on a gym membership to make yourself more valuable.

If the goal is your own success it might be better spent on a gym membership, save on future medical costs and make yourself more attractive for a higher paying job.

(02-25-2017 02:13 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 02:05 PM)panama Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 02:03 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 01:48 PM)panama Wrote:  You do get that any athletics budget at any university is a subset of the universities operating budget, right?

They are taking funds that could be used on a new research park and instead investing it into FBS football.

That's like saying you make $100k a year and someone says you should not spent $1000 to add a deck to your house because you could be repairing your driveway. Maybe I can do both because I make $100k.

It's more like spending $1000 on a deck with the hopes of making your property more valuable or spending $1000 on a gym membership to make yourself more valuable.

If the goal is your own success it might be better spent on a gym membership, save on future medical costs and make yourself more attractive for a higher paying job.

But that is an opinion. And maybe I am hosting parties on my deck that will make the CEO one day.

The point is someone thinks their is value. The spring after our first football season admissions saw 31k applications for Fall 2011 enrollment. What was different? Football? Playing Alabama? The point is that even if only 12k people show up there is no other university event where 12k to 30k people congregate. And the value of that university commercial in even a low level bowl game is priceless. Division II schools do not make the paper or preseason magazines. Their coaches are not on morning talk. Think of where Memphis was the year before Justin Fuente was hired. Less than 60 scholarship players. Dozens of fans in the Liberty Bowl. Then argument could have been made that football was not worth it.