In case you didn't realize how cash-strapped the athletic dept was.

Rankings:
Revenue - #54 (no P5 ranked lower; 2nd highest of G5 behind UConn)
Expenses - #55 (no P5 ranked lower; 2 G5's ahead of us)
Subsidy % - #158 (44% of costs subsidized by non-athletic revenue; too many G5's to count are less subsidized than us)

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

That's why I keep saying until proven otherwise we have the FB Coaching staff we do mostly because of $$$

Look, you pay a guy what we are, it's stupid to not pay for quality assistants who are actually doing most of the coaching and recruiting. What are we getting, otherwise? An innovator? A guy players will run through walls for? A top recruiter? Rhetorical questions.

So what teams aren't listed, because there are (10+12+14+14+14) 64 P5 schools, and rankings in the 50s should be above somebody.

we are better off than I thought ha!

(04-18-2016 05:52 PM)Teakwood Wrote:  So what teams aren't listed, because there are (10+12+14+14+14) 64 P5 schools, and rankings in the 50s should be above somebody.

Privates are not obligated to disclose this information.

So, for example, Notre Dame is not part of this discussion. Nor are Duke or Wake Forrest.

Just saying.

I really love CFB but I have a very hard time coming to grips with students subsidizing the AD through fees. I can accept some degree of taxpayer subsidization as an advertising expense.
I would like to see greater self sufficiency.

I do think new television deals will help schools beyond the so called power 5 conferences.
MACtion is must see mid week TV

(04-21-2016 06:55 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I do think new television deals will help schools beyond the so called power 5 conferences.
MACtion is must see mid week TV

Especially by the 500 people in the stands.

(04-22-2016 10:23 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  

(04-21-2016 06:55 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I do think new television deals will help schools beyond the so called power 5 conferences.
MACtion is must see mid week TV

Especially by the 500 people in the stands.

That's usually only at Miami- LMAO. Your comment does reinforce the point that the television revenue/exposure is of greater value than the gate revenue.
The MAC really did a nice job with this.

(04-21-2016 06:53 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I really love CFB but I have a very hard time coming to grips with students subsidizing the AD through fees. I can accept some degree of taxpayer subsidization as an advertising expense.
I would like to see greater self sufficiency.

Some Ohio schools are further subsidized through Ohio taxpayers. And some more than others (and unproportionally so based upon the local economic impact and number of students and graduates). I bet your mind would explode if you saw those numbers.

I wonder if there might be some consolidation of state universities in our near future in order to contain costs?

That will only work if the number of students drop enough to close some current campuses. Having a current campus be a "branch" of another university will result in no savings.

If the state wants to save some money, they could subsidize Ohio students directly instead of sending the money to be wasted at the universities.

(04-23-2016 11:44 PM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  That will only work if the number of students drop enough to close some current campuses. Having a current campus be a "branch" of another university will result in no savings.

If the state wants to save some money, they could subsidize Ohio students directly instead of sending the money to be wasted at the universities.

I'm in complete agreement about directly subsidizing students even assigning precedence to critical disciplines.
However, I am talking about the outright closure of a school like Akron, or other stand alone smaller state school, that can be easily serviced by another school.
Is there any viability in that path? I think some hard choices must be made and should be driven by the demands of making our students competitive in a 21st century economy.

(04-21-2016 06:53 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I really love CFB but I have a very hard time coming to grips with students subsidizing the AD through fees. I can accept some degree of taxpayer subsidization as an advertising expense.
I would like to see greater self sufficiency.

OSU is in debt to a tune of about 1 Billion. That is more troubling than student fees.

(04-24-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-21-2016 06:53 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I really love CFB but I have a very hard time coming to grips with students subsidizing the AD through fees. I can accept some degree of taxpayer subsidization as an advertising expense.
I would like to see greater self sufficiency.

OSU is in debt to a tune of about 1 Billion. That is more troubling than student fees.

preach it

(04-24-2016 05:53 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-21-2016 06:53 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I really love CFB but I have a very hard time coming to grips with students subsidizing the AD through fees. I can accept some degree of taxpayer subsidization as an advertising expense.
I would like to see greater self sufficiency.

OSU is in debt to a tune of about 1 Billion. That is more troubling than student fees.

preach it

As of 2015, debt at selected Ohio Public Universities:

Total debt outstanding at Ohio public universities
Borrowing at Ohio's 14 public universities more than doubled over the last decade. Most spending was for building construction and renovations

.



That's a lot of debt, folks.

Source: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news...65b/nj83M/

I think all the state schools are ok. If there is going to be any schools bowing out in the next decade or so it may be some of the smaller privates (I am not taking a swipe at XU-- they are fine--- I am talking about some others in the state). Enrollments at those schools keep dwindling and the debt keep piling on. Unless you are a school with a national rep like Case Western or Kenyon College there is probably no reason to send your kid to Small Private U. for $50-60K a year when you can send them to State U. for half the cost or less (the only exception would be a scholarship situation).

That's a lot of debt for UC, but I believe our endowment is about the same amount?

(04-25-2016 07:12 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:53 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 02:56 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-21-2016 06:53 PM)OhioIsMySacredHome Wrote:  I really love CFB but I have a very hard time coming to grips with students subsidizing the AD through fees. I can accept some degree of taxpayer subsidization as an advertising expense.
I would like to see greater self sufficiency.

OSU is in debt to a tune of about 1 Billion. That is more troubling than student fees.

preach it

As of 2015, debt at selected Ohio Public Universities:

Total debt outstanding at Ohio public universities
Borrowing at Ohio's 14 public universities more than doubled over the last decade. Most spending was for building construction and renovations

.



That's a lot of debt, folks.

Source: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news...65b/nj83M/

For schools that are sitting on a lot of liquid assets with a good return and acceptable risk, the debt financing is a good thing.

For example, let's assume that you have $100k in a low risk, good return mutual fund and you want to buy a new car for $25k. You are able to get a loan for the car at an interest rate that is less than the return on the mutual fund. You would be foolish to pay cash for the car since you would be lowering your overall return on your assets.

The list of debt is a good thing, but without more information (e.g., current liquid position, current and projected 5 year return on assets, etc.), there is little true information that can be gleaned from the list.