Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
Author Message
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 7,844
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 301
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #11
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing Im noticing is that some schools apparently count capital spending in their annual budgets and some do not. That potentially creates some massive problems when comparing budgets. Just as an example (and because Im very familiar with the situation), Houston currently has roughly 80 million in capital athletics projects underway (basketball arena renovation and new IPF). Of that amount, about 50 million of it is funded by private donations. If these expenditures were included, Houston's numbers would reflect a budget of over 100 million and it would probably sit at the top of your list of budgets minus student fees and transfers. Not only that, but the total capital expenditures for UH since 2013 add up to over a quarter of a billion--the majority of which is derived from private donations. So this category would have affected almost every years budget at UH since 2013.

Im not saying we dont have some pretty ugly institutional support numbers---but it is worth noting that when comparing budget numbers, there are alot of moving parts that can vastly affect the picture these numbers paint.

So you are saying that Colorado St building their new 200 million or whatever football stadium could somehow count that as revenue? That would be highly dishonest. (I'm not saying they are doing that) Schools constantly build new facilities, venues etc. A school on the Kentucky/Ohio border just built a fabulous new basketball arena that Cincinnati will play in this year. I don't think anyone counts that venue investment as revenue, until they start making revenue on it by selling tics, parking, concessions etc
07-06-2017 08:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gulfcoastgal Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,016
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 109
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 06:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Top G5 programs minus the "institutional robbery" of student fees and transfers, as derived from the USA Today data Attackcoog posted. This is revenue actually generated by the athletic department.

The AAC has 4 of the top 5, with UConn comfortably at #1, but surprisingly, to me, west coast schools are well-represented, with 5 of the top 11, moreso than the overall revenue figures would indicate. Reason? western schools don't use the truly massive $20m+ subsidies that the AAC schools use. IMO, this reveals the hidden strength of west coast schools in deriving athletic revenues.

As an aside, this also reveals the weakness of my USF: In the official chart, USF is #8 in G5 athletic revenue. But once institutional transfers are deleted, we fall to #15. This is embarrassing for a school that was in the Big Boy club for 9 years. It especially sucks given UCF's relative strength, and UCF hasn't been getting the extra Big East money that we have been getting. Houston also takes a tumble, checking in at #5 on the USA Today list but #13 here.

1) UCONN ..... $44 million

2) Cincy ....... $35 million

3) Boise ........ $34 million

4) UCF .......... $33 million

5) Memphis ... $32 million

6) Army ........ $31 million

7) New Mexico .... $30 million

8) SDSU ............. $30 million

9) Arkansas St ..... $30 million

10) UNLV ............... $28 million

11) Hawaii ............. $27 million

12) ECU ................ $27 million

13) Houston .......... $26 million

14) Fresno ............ $25 million

15) USF ................ $24 million

After quickly glancing through this list, Boise, Memphis and New Mexico appear to be the only schools that generated more money from their fan bases than they received from the school in 15/16. Ticket Sales + Contributions > Student Fees + School Funds
07-06-2017 08:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
otown Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 950
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 06:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-06-2017 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing Im noticing is that some schools apparently count capital spending in their annual budgets and some do not. That potentially creates some massive problems when comparing budgets. Just as an example, Houston currently has about 80 million in capital athletics projects underway. Of that amount, about 50 million of it is funded by private donations. If these expenditures were included, Houston numbers would reflect a budget of over 100 million and it would probably sit at the top of your list of budgets minus student fees and transfers. Not only that, but the capital expenditures for UH since 2013 is well over a quarter of a billion--more than half of which is all private donations. So it would have affected almost every year since 2013.

I don't know how USA Today accounts for capital projects. I guess they don't include them either, otherwise Houston would be way above the $51 million in overall revenue they list them at. I guess in their way of reckoning, such things don't count.

As a USF fan, this list is really sobering to me. Schools like Hawaii and Arkansas State are generating a lot more athletic dollars than we are. That is pretty sad.

Does this have anything to do with the lack of an OCS?

Does USF have to rent the facility and pay fees to the city?

Just what are their expenses to use it?

Does all ticket revenue go to the school?

What about premium seats as I live in Orlando and received a big booklet from the Bucs trying to get me to buy into the new hall of fame club, which included admission to all USF games.

What about concessions?
07-06-2017 08:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,878
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 820
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 08:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(07-06-2017 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing Im noticing is that some schools apparently count capital spending in their annual budgets and some do not. That potentially creates some massive problems when comparing budgets. Just as an example (and because Im very familiar with the situation), Houston currently has roughly 80 million in capital athletics projects underway (basketball arena renovation and new IPF). Of that amount, about 50 million of it is funded by private donations. If these expenditures were included, Houston's numbers would reflect a budget of over 100 million and it would probably sit at the top of your list of budgets minus student fees and transfers. Not only that, but the total capital expenditures for UH since 2013 add up to over a quarter of a billion--the majority of which is derived from private donations. So this category would have affected almost every years budget at UH since 2013.

Im not saying we dont have some pretty ugly institutional support numbers---but it is worth noting that when comparing budget numbers, there are alot of moving parts that can vastly affect the picture these numbers paint.

So you are saying that Colorado St building their new 200 million or whatever football stadium could somehow count that as revenue? That would be highly dishonest. (I'm not saying they are doing that) Schools constantly build new facilities, venues etc. A school on the Kentucky/Ohio border just built a fabulous new basketball arena that Cincinnati will play in this year. I don't think anyone counts that venue investment as revenue, until they start making revenue on it by selling tics, parking, concessions etc

I dont know if they did or not. Looking at thier numbers I think its clear they did not. Some schools do. Some don't. On the other hand, I do know that UNLV counts all the convention revenue generated by the Thomas Mack Center (which hosts a lot of conventions) as athletics revenue. Because of its Vegas location, that convention/catering revenue is substantial (I'd guess half their revenue). It used to make more, but other venues have cut into their market share.
(This post was last modified: 07-06-2017 09:20 PM by Attackcoog.)
07-06-2017 09:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,943
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 176
I Root For: UC
Location: SD & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #15
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 06:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  The AAC has 4 of the top 5, with UConn comfortably at #1, but surprisingly, to me, west coast schools are well-represented, with 5 of the top 11, moreso than the overall revenue figures would indicate. Reason? western schools don't use the truly massive $20m+ subsidies that the AAC schools use. IMO, this reveals the hidden strength of west coast schools in deriving athletic revenues.

This does not surprise me at all. Other than San Diego State and San Jose State, none of the MWC has competition from pro sports.

Also only 2 MWC schools are on the West Coast, so the MWC doesn't have the West Coast cultural indifference to sports. Even Fresno has more in common with Arkansas than it does with the beach communities and big cities on the West coast.
07-06-2017 09:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,772
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 318
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #16
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 07:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-06-2017 06:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(07-06-2017 06:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-06-2017 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing Im noticing is that some schools apparently count capital spending in their annual budgets and some do not. That potentially creates some massive problems when comparing budgets. Just as an example, Houston currently has about 80 million in capital athletics projects underway. Of that amount, about 50 million of it is funded by private donations. If these expenditures were included, Houston numbers would reflect a budget of over 100 million and it would probably sit at the top of your list of budgets minus student fees and transfers. Not only that, but the capital expenditures for UH since 2013 is well over a quarter of a billion--more than half of which is all private donations. So it would have affected almost every year since 2013.

I don't know how USA Today accounts for capital projects. I guess they don't include them either, otherwise Houston would be way above the $51 million in overall revenue they list them at. I guess in their way of reckoning, such things don't count.

As a USF fan, this list is really sobering to me. Schools like Hawaii and Arkansas State are generating a lot more athletic dollars than we are. That is pretty sad.

I know for a fact that Arky State and A&M are counting those capital projects. I know we do not. Cant really say beyond those 3.

I had assumed that USA Today was using their own methodology, such that schools lack the power to manipulate their numbers. If all they are doing is compiling data the schools report to them, using their own methods, then the list is far less useful to us.
I always go to the Equity in Athletics site because those are the raw numbers reported to the government.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
07-06-2017 09:58 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 527
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 20
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
07-06-2017 10:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Online
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 19,878
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 558
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 08:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(07-06-2017 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing Im noticing is that some schools apparently count capital spending in their annual budgets and some do not. That potentially creates some massive problems when comparing budgets. Just as an example (and because Im very familiar with the situation), Houston currently has roughly 80 million in capital athletics projects underway (basketball arena renovation and new IPF). Of that amount, about 50 million of it is funded by private donations. If these expenditures were included, Houston's numbers would reflect a budget of over 100 million and it would probably sit at the top of your list of budgets minus student fees and transfers. Not only that, but the total capital expenditures for UH since 2013 add up to over a quarter of a billion--the majority of which is derived from private donations. So this category would have affected almost every years budget at UH since 2013.

Im not saying we dont have some pretty ugly institutional support numbers---but it is worth noting that when comparing budget numbers, there are alot of moving parts that can vastly affect the picture these numbers paint.

So you are saying that Colorado St building their new 200 million or whatever football stadium could somehow count that as revenue? That would be highly dishonest. (I'm not saying they are doing that) Schools constantly build new facilities, venues etc. A school on the Kentucky/Ohio border just built a fabulous new basketball arena that Cincinnati will play in this year. I don't think anyone counts that venue investment as revenue, until they start making revenue on it by selling tics, parking, concessions etc

I would presume they borrowed money.
So every time they make a loan payment that is an athletic expense. Every dollar contributed, every new dollar in sponsorship or ticket sales used to make that payment is revenue.
07-06-2017 10:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Online
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 19,878
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 558
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.

No fancy accounting. Some big one-time gifts to fund a new press box with suites, club seating and loge boxes.

For example the bank that had our naming rights deal was bought out. The new owner helped fund the renovation by paying the present value of the entire deal in a lump sum. The owner of the bank that bought the bank out, donated $5 million personally toward the renovation.

That plus other giving and first year payments on premium seating (7 year commitments) and new record season ticket sales boosted revenue nearly $15 million while school subsidy dropped by $1 million so budget goes up $14 million for the year.
07-06-2017 10:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,772
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 318
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #20
RE: Top G5 Athletic Revenue Schools (Minus Academic side transfers) ...
(07-06-2017 10:09 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm a little shocked to see Arkansas St on here. Are they doing some fancy accounting down there or something? It's odd that C-USA would pass up on a program with such a good financial footing then again all of their expansion moves have been about chasing markets.
If memory serves me their numbers include capital projects.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
07-06-2017 10:26 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.