Con Rank National Rank
1). 63 Old Dominion C-USA $43,994,715 $42,780,118 $28,419,259 64.60
2). 77 Charlotte C-USA $33,124,557 $28,573,920 $22,632,085 68.32
3). 81 Alabama at Birmingham C-USA $31,896,726 $31,066,375 $19,607,780 61.47
4). 83Middle Tennessee C-USA $31,671,166 $31,671,166 $19,459,839 61.44
5). 85 North Texas C-USA $31,312,298 $31,268,741 $20,079,077 64.13
6). 86Florida Atlantic C-USA $30,919,633 $29,794,361 $19,023,004 61.52
7). 88 Western Kentucky C-USA $30,212,548 $30,212,548 $19,493,007 64.52
8). 89 Texas-El Paso C-USA $29,836,835 $29,395,257 $15,949,810 53.46
9). 95Florida International C-USA $28,613,452 $30,483,759 $23,620,086 82.55
10). 101 Marshall C-USA $27,069,138 $27,397,209 $12,218,077 45.14
11). 105 Texas-San Antonio C-USA $26,807,547 $26,177,864 $13,793,982 51.46
12). 118 Southern Mississippi C-USA $23,972,589 $24,546,909 $8,787,048 36.65
13). 124 Louisiana Tech C-USA $22,209,912 $21,849,418 $9,683,929 43.60
* Rice not list

Link.... http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Tried to delete after I realized there was a thread already on the topic....sorry

I would say La Tech, So Miss, and Marshall are getting the most bang for their buck.

(04-17-2016 06:09 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I would say La Tech, So Miss, and Marshall are getting the most bang for their buck.

Yep. Invariably these discussions will turn into so and so budget is large so their school belongs in the AAC. If thats the case FCS James Madison belongs in the AAC because their budget is larger than any CUSA school. Powerhouse Eastern Michigan deserves a look also. So should upstarts ODU and Charlotte. What they fail to realize is G5 budgets that are heavily subsidized and not turning a profit are not any better off, and the results on the field usually point to this.

(04-18-2016 01:01 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 06:09 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I would say La Tech, So Miss, and Marshall are getting the most bang for their buck.

Yep. Invariably these discussions will turn into so and so budget is large so their school belongs in the AAC. If thats the case FCS James Madison belongs in the AAC because their budget is larger than any CUSA school. Powerhouse Eastern Michigan deserves a look also. So should upstarts ODU and Charlotte. What they fail to realize is G5 budgets that are heavily subsidized and not turning a profit are not any better off, and the results on the field usually point to this.

Why can't you look at things positively. IMHO LT, Marshall and Southern Miss are getting the best ROI of any one in this league. ODU, Charlotte and UAB are all doing mediocre for what they are pouring in. Anyways don't let every thread turn to a dick measuring contest.

(04-18-2016 08:12 AM)12thmonarch Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 01:01 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 06:09 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I would say La Tech, So Miss, and Marshall are getting the most bang for their buck.

Yep. Invariably these discussions will turn into so and so budget is large so their school belongs in the AAC. If thats the case FCS James Madison belongs in the AAC because their budget is larger than any CUSA school. Powerhouse Eastern Michigan deserves a look also. So should upstarts ODU and Charlotte. What they fail to realize is G5 budgets that are heavily subsidized and not turning a profit are not any better off, and the results on the field usually point to this.

Why can't you look at things positively. IMHO LT, Marshall and Southern Miss are getting the best ROI of any one in this league. ODU, Charlotte and UAB are all doing mediocre for what they are pouring in. Anyways don't let every thread turn to a dick measuring contest.

I'm flattered that you think we are mediocre. I personally think you're giving us too much credit.

(04-17-2016 02:42 PM)ODU Oldtimer Wrote:  

CUSA Athletic Budgets (ODU has the highest budget among CUSA Schools)

Con Rank National Rank
1). 63 Old Dominion C-USA $43,994,715 $42,780,118 $28,419,259 64.60
2). 77 Charlotte C-USA $33,124,557 $28,573,920 $22,632,085 68.32
3). 81 Alabama at Birmingham C-USA $31,896,726 $31,066,375 $19,607,780 61.47
4). 83Middle Tennessee C-USA $31,671,166 $31,671,166 $19,459,839 61.44
5). 85 North Texas C-USA $31,312,298 $31,268,741 $20,079,077 64.13
6). 86Florida Atlantic C-USA $30,919,633 $29,794,361 $19,023,004 61.52
7). 88 Western Kentucky C-USA $30,212,548 $30,212,548 $19,493,007 64.52
8). 89 Texas-El Paso C-USA $29,836,835 $29,395,257 $15,949,810 53.46
9). 95Florida International C-USA $28,613,452 $30,483,759 $23,620,086 82.55
10). 101 Marshall C-USA $27,069,138 $27,397,209 $12,218,077 45.14
11). 105 Texas-San Antonio C-USA $26,807,547 $26,177,864 $13,793,982 51.46
12). 118 Southern Mississippi C-USA $23,972,589 $24,546,909 $8,787,048 36.65
13). 124 Louisiana Tech C-USA $22,209,912 $21,849,418 $9,683,929 43.60
* Rice not list

Link.... http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Tried to delete after I realized there was a thread already on the topic....sorry

I am not intending to be picky here but these are technically the universities record of INCOME AND EXPENSES for the fiscal year. They are NOT their budgets. A budget is formulated and decided upon PRIOR to a fiscal year or period setting forth anticipated expenses and the amount and sources of revenue and we seldom ever see those. It is an absolutely necessary process though wherein the departments or agencies can track their performance as the period progresses and a flag to alert those in charge when and where to make changes and adjustments in order to reach the fiscal period objective. Some stay within budget, some are in excess but we never know since those are usually kept under the rug.

(04-18-2016 08:14 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 08:12 AM)12thmonarch Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 01:01 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 06:09 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I would say La Tech, So Miss, and Marshall are getting the most bang for their buck.

Yep. Invariably these discussions will turn into so and so budget is large so their school belongs in the AAC. If thats the case FCS James Madison belongs in the AAC because their budget is larger than any CUSA school. Powerhouse Eastern Michigan deserves a look also. So should upstarts ODU and Charlotte. What they fail to realize is G5 budgets that are heavily subsidized and not turning a profit are not any better off, and the results on the field usually point to this.

Why can't you look at things positively. IMHO LT, Marshall and Southern Miss are getting the best ROI of any one in this league. ODU, Charlotte and UAB are all doing mediocre for what they are pouring in. Anyways don't let every thread turn to a dick measuring contest.

I'm flattered that you think we are mediocre. I personally think you're giving us too much credit.

Nah i still think both ODU and Charlotte are mediocre. There are schools on the list that would win an underachiever supremo by knocking us out say like Virginia, JMU etc.

Its shocking to me how the lower end of the the list is where most of the competitive Football programs are. That's amazing.

(04-18-2016 08:12 AM)12thmonarch Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 01:01 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 06:09 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I would say La Tech, So Miss, and Marshall are getting the most bang for their buck.

Yep. Invariably these discussions will turn into so and so budget is large so their school belongs in the AAC. If thats the case FCS James Madison belongs in the AAC because their budget is larger than any CUSA school. Powerhouse Eastern Michigan deserves a look also. So should upstarts ODU and Charlotte. What they fail to realize is G5 budgets that are heavily subsidized and not turning a profit are not any better off, and the results on the field usually point to this.

Why can't you look at things positively. IMHO LT, Marshall and Southern Miss are getting the best ROI of any one in this league. ODU, Charlotte and UAB are all doing mediocre for what they are pouring in. Anyways don't let every thread turn to a dick measuring contest.

I dont know maybe because a thread was posted ranking CUSA athletic budgets after the orginal budget thread was already posted.

(04-18-2016 09:03 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 08:12 AM)12thmonarch Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 01:01 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(04-17-2016 06:09 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I would say La Tech, So Miss, and Marshall are getting the most bang for their buck.

Yep. Invariably these discussions will turn into so and so budget is large so their school belongs in the AAC. If thats the case FCS James Madison belongs in the AAC because their budget is larger than any CUSA school. Powerhouse Eastern Michigan deserves a look also. So should upstarts ODU and Charlotte. What they fail to realize is G5 budgets that are heavily subsidized and not turning a profit are not any better off, and the results on the field usually point to this.

Why can't you look at things positively. IMHO LT, Marshall and Southern Miss are getting the best ROI of any one in this league. ODU, Charlotte and UAB are all doing mediocre for what they are pouring in. Anyways don't let every thread turn to a dick measuring contest.

I dont know maybe because a thread was posted ranking CUSA athletic budgets after the orginal budget thread with a link was already posted.

Oh Gawd. Did you actually read the complete OP's post. He clearly said "He wanted to delete this realizing that there was an existing thread with the same subject matter" and how on earth did you arrive at that conclusion and pulled a "Oh gee may be we should be in the AAC" from a post that is ranking athletic expenses and income.

Yeah, our 2014 athletic budget was $28.33 million. I can't find anything current.

Interesting but would be more useful if vast differences in tuition levels were taken into account.

If one subtracts subsidies, USM shoots to the top of the list. Meaning our fans actually provide a great deal of support.

(04-18-2016 09:50 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Interesting but would be more useful if vast differences in tuition levels were taken into account.

I don't know if that would play into athletic budgets but it should be noted that there is no set accounting standards for these numbers so there's only so much to be gained by comparing them. I think it's safe to say that everyone's budget would increase if they resided in VA due to state reporting laws. Take it all with a grain of salt.

(04-18-2016 09:10 AM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  Yeah, our 2014 athletic budget was $28.33 million. I can't find anything current.

Most working budgets can be found on university websites under finance. If not easily found there, the applicable BOR usually posts annual reports supplied by member school(s). In the case of Marshall, it looks like they just released a white paper on athletic budgets and funding...good info here.

Quote: The Bottom Line

Q. What is Marshall’s annual budget for athletics? What are the sources of funding?

A. As reported to Conference USA, Marshall’s 2015-16 budget for intercollegiate athletics totals $27.2 million. The sources of funds include $15.4 million in self-generated revenue from private donations, marketing and media rights, bowl game revenues, parking and concessions, ticket sales, private suite rentals and Conference USA income. The remaining $11.8 million of the budget is institutional support, including student auxiliary fees and tuition waivers. As show in Chart A, this compares favorably among the 14 Conference USA peer institutions.

http://www.marshall.edu/2020/files/Inter...3-2016.pdf

ETA: Surprised a beat writer or someone else local hasn't picked it up yet.

(04-18-2016 01:01 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  Yep. Invariably these discussions will turn into so and so budget is large so their school belongs in the AAC. If thats the case FCS James Madison belongs in the AAC because their budget is larger than any CUSA school. Powerhouse Eastern Michigan deserves a look also. So should upstarts ODU and Charlotte. What they fail to realize is G5 budgets that are heavily subsidized and not turning a profit are not any better off, and the results on the field usually point to this.

I know Charlotte was around 81% when we started football in 2013, so improvements are being made. The subsidized portion should continue to shrink with the growth of the program, just a little patience is required.

(04-18-2016 10:11 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 09:10 AM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  Yeah, our 2014 athletic budget was $28.33 million. I can't find anything current.

Most working budgets can be found on university websites under finance. If not easily found there, the applicable BOR usually posts annual reports supplied by member school(s). In the case of Marshall, it looks like they just released a white paper on athletic budgets and funding...good info here.

Quote: The Bottom Line

Q. What is Marshall’s annual budget for athletics? What are the sources of funding?

A. As reported to Conference USA, Marshall’s 2015-16 budget for intercollegiate athletics totals $27.2 million. The sources of funds include $15.4 million in self-generated revenue from private donations, marketing and media rights, bowl game revenues, parking and concessions, ticket sales, private suite rentals and Conference USA income. The remaining $11.8 million of the budget is institutional support, including student auxiliary fees and tuition waivers. As show in Chart A, this compares favorably among the 14 Conference USA peer institutions.

http://www.marshall.edu/2020/files/Inter...3-2016.pdf

ETA: Surprised a beat writer or someone else local hasn't picked it up yet.

Good stuff! Thanks.

(04-18-2016 08:58 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Its shocking to me how the lower end of the the list is where most of the competitive Football programs are. That's amazing.

Not really. The lower end is the least subsidized end, so that means the fans are carrying it more. You can talk facilities, budget, history, etc. but it's a lot easier to recruit when you bring HS kids into stadiums with a lot of people in them relative to the other schools they are looking at.

(04-18-2016 01:10 PM)banker Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 08:58 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Its shocking to me how the lower end of the the list is where most of the competitive Football programs are. That's amazing.

Not really. The lower end is the least subsidized end, so that means the fans are carrying it more. You can talk facilities, budget, history, etc. but it's a lot easier to recruit when you bring HS kids into stadiums with a lot of people in them relative to the other schools they are looking at.

I am taking nothing from anybody when I say this, but USM, TECH and Marshall have been playing for championships for a long time. I count a total of 46 total conference championships and 43 bowls and 7 total National titles between the three schools. I think the fact that tuition is much cheaper at those three schools has something to do with it as well.

(04-18-2016 01:36 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 01:10 PM)banker Wrote:  

(04-18-2016 08:58 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  Its shocking to me how the lower end of the the list is where most of the competitive Football programs are. That's amazing.

Not really. The lower end is the least subsidized end, so that means the fans are carrying it more. You can talk facilities, budget, history, etc. but it's a lot easier to recruit when you bring HS kids into stadiums with a lot of people in them relative to the other schools they are looking at.

I am taking nothing from anybody when I say this, but USM, TECH and Marshall have been playing for championships for a long time. I count a total of 46 total conference championships and 43 bowls and 7 total National titles between the three schools. I think the fact that tuition is much cheaper at those three schools has something to do with it as well.

If I'm not mistaken Western had 8 conference championships the first year in CUSA. A conference record...

coming into CUSA Western had 42 conference championships in the previous 6 seasons. Only behind Notre Dame's 46 and BYU's 43. So across all sports Western is doing fairly well. Just need to get the basketball program back to the level we are use to. And hopefully keep football year in year out as a top 2-3 in the east at worse most years.

As for fan support supplying the dollars...can't always count on that. But the student fee for 30k (FIU) is going to be there year in year out no matter if they lose every game in all sports. Where a school that is depended on dollars from tickets sold there is only so much room to grow a budget from...

depending on where you are (% of seats) at

So if a FIU starts to win and gets their attendance up to 60-75% then they have the room to grow a budget to the mid to high 40s.

I would guess most of the subsidize part is student fees..once it's there it's there. Just like when a a city or state or feds level a new tax on something. But ideally you also want great fan support along with those fees