Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
Author Message
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,615
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #81
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
How does 14.4 & 14.3 add up to 80 million
07-09-2019 02:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #82
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-08-2019 08:41 PM)Bogg Wrote:  
(07-08-2019 07:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  Villanova tried to move up even later using an off campus soccer stadium seating 20k. Big East told them that wasn't good enough.

Villanova was never serious about moving up and presented a plan they knew would be rejected to be done with it because the Big East wanted them to move up in order to get to 8. There's no real desire there.

(07-08-2019 07:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  It was a UConn vs. Louisville vs. Rutgers. And if they had 12 more years to build their program, perhaps they have a strong enough football program they win one of those two contests.

The Big East started sponsoring football in 1991, and Lew Perkins (who pushed the whole football move-up) was hired in 1990 when they were putting it all together. UConn moved up in 2000. Even if they had gotten the momentum to move up football right away, the logistics of it mean you're not accomplishing that until 93 or 94, so it's like an extra 6 or 7 years you're talking about. The last round of expansion had UConn coming off a series of bowl games, including a Fiesta Bowl - what more are they realistically going to do out of the state of Connecticut with an extra 6 years? Win a BCS title?

(07-08-2019 07:39 PM)bullet Wrote:  Villanova actually should have dropped football instead of adding scholarships to get to 63. FCS is a money drain. Nobody mishandled it worse than Villanova.

Their FCS team is stashed in a football-only conference at that level and doesn't impact the rest of the athletic department's positioning. The team's actually not bad either, winning an FCS championship 10 years ago. They just won two national championships in three years in their headliner sport and their national profile in basketball is currently about as high as it's ever been. If the school wants to keep a football team around as an on-campus student amenity/alumni outreach opportunity and it's not negatively impacting their overall athletic department, it's hard to credibly call that mismanagement.

The bold is total nonsense. They believed they were going up with that stupid plan. They were surprised it didn't work. They lucked out and got rejected.

They're basically a small private school playing football mostly with a bunch of state schools that aren't their peers and aren't rivals. That doesn't make sense.
07-09-2019 03:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bogg Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,846
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 154
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #83
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-09-2019 03:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  The bold is total nonsense. They believed they were going up with that stupid plan. They were surprised it didn't work. They lucked out and got rejected.

They never even formally voted to approve the plan for official presentation to the Big East.

http://www.vuhoops.com/platform/amp/vill...rientation

Quote:In 2010, the issue arose again, with the college football landscape again beginning to shift drastically and with Villanova coming off of an FCS National Championship season in 2009, the Big East asked the Wildcats to reconsider the issue. Football television dollars had grown significantly in the prior decade and the decision should have been a slam dunk, but again, the President of Villanova seemed disinterested, according to sources close to the situation. A number of Trustees as well as Jay Wright and then-AD Vince Nicastro pushed the issue, however, and a new study was initiated, and again the results looked positive, with enough alumni appearing interested in supporting an FBS program, and dollar signs lining up right. Still, the administration stalled, pushing back the decision until April of 2011 -- supposedly to attempt to raise a significant dollar figure to go toward facilities improvements.

Ultimately, a small group of Big East football schools ultimately lost their patience waiting for Villanova and the whole deal was torpedoed. A lack of interest from the Presidents' office has been cited as a major factor.

The administration wasn't interested and dragged their feet on a bad plan until the offer got pulled. I'd also dispute the idea that the dollars made sense, since the study at the time estimated that Nova would lose around $7 million a year playing FBS football (in the Big East, nevermind the AAC).


(07-09-2019 03:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  They're basically a small private school playing football mostly with a bunch of state schools that aren't their peers and aren't rivals. That doesn't make sense.

CAAF is the top-level FCS conference on the East coast, and their biggest rivalry is against Delaware, just down 95. It makes a ton more sense than an FBS move would have.
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019 05:13 PM by Bogg.)
07-09-2019 05:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #84
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-09-2019 05:12 PM)Bogg Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 03:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  The bold is total nonsense. They believed they were going up with that stupid plan. They were surprised it didn't work. They lucked out and got rejected.

They never even formally voted to approve the plan for official presentation to the Big East.

http://www.vuhoops.com/platform/amp/vill...rientation

Quote:In 2010, the issue arose again, with the college football landscape again beginning to shift drastically and with Villanova coming off of an FCS National Championship season in 2009, the Big East asked the Wildcats to reconsider the issue. Football television dollars had grown significantly in the prior decade and the decision should have been a slam dunk, but again, the President of Villanova seemed disinterested, according to sources close to the situation. A number of Trustees as well as Jay Wright and then-AD Vince Nicastro pushed the issue, however, and a new study was initiated, and again the results looked positive, with enough alumni appearing interested in supporting an FBS program, and dollar signs lining up right. Still, the administration stalled, pushing back the decision until April of 2011 -- supposedly to attempt to raise a significant dollar figure to go toward facilities improvements.

Ultimately, a small group of Big East football schools ultimately lost their patience waiting for Villanova and the whole deal was torpedoed. A lack of interest from the Presidents' office has been cited as a major factor.

The administration wasn't interested and dragged their feet on a bad plan until the offer got pulled. I'd also dispute the idea that the dollars made sense, since the study at the time estimated that Nova would lose around $7 million a year playing FBS football (in the Big East, nevermind the AAC).


(07-09-2019 03:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  They're basically a small private school playing football mostly with a bunch of state schools that aren't their peers and aren't rivals. That doesn't make sense.

CAAF is the top-level FCS conference on the East coast, and their biggest rivalry is against Delaware, just down 95. It makes a ton more sense than an FBS move would have.

Even if true, that doesn't mean FCS makes sense. Pretty sure they dropped scholarships at one point in the 80s. Shouldn't have added them back.
07-09-2019 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #85
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
The question is that Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn. State, Pittsburgh and Boston College are in the wrong conference because the culture are different. Houston, Memphis, Notre Dame, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, Louisville, Cincinnati and some others do not fit either because of the culture differences.

I think you could get schools to become competitive again if you you create more power conferences and spread the wealth around. Yankee Conference could work for the northeast schools.

UConn.
UMass.
Syracuse
Buffalo
Temple
Pittsburgh
Penn. State
Rutgers
West Virginia
Maryland
Boston College
Delaware

Louisville, Cincinnati and Notre Dame to the Big 10.
Memphis, UCF, USF, UAB, Tulane, ECU, ODU and Georgia State are all strong academics schools that could go into ACC and SEC.
Arkansa, Missouri, Houston, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Colorado State, New Mexico, NDSU, South Dakota State, Montana State and Montana are strong academics to be Big 12 and add Texas A&M, Rice and North Texas to the list.
BYU, Utah State, Boise State, Hawaii, San Diego State, Idaho, Portland State, UC-Davis, UNR and Idaho State are R2 and up for the PAC 12. The culture of all the conferences is an issue because of where the schools are located. Fans do not feel the same as school presidents do. Texhoma 4 would be rejected by the fans of the PAC 12 because those 4 schools are not west coast schools that have similar culture. They rejected Colorado and still do to this day. It is one reason why football attendance of many schools are down.
07-09-2019 06:19 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #86
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-09-2019 06:19 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The question is that Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn. State, Pittsburgh and Boston College are in the wrong conference because the culture are different.

I agree with that. The northeast teams that are in the B1G and ACC should be in a northeast conference - Penn State, Syracuse, UConn, BC, Maryland, Rutgers, WVU, Pitt.
07-09-2019 06:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Native Georgian Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,513
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 1024
I Root For: TULANE+GA.STATE
Location: Decatur GA
Post: #87
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-09-2019 06:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 06:19 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The question is that Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn. State, Pittsburgh and Boston College are in the wrong conference because the culture are different.

I agree with that. The northeast teams that are in the B1G and ACC should be in a northeast conference - Penn State, Syracuse, UConn, BC, Maryland, Rutgers, WVU, Pitt.
It happens so rarely, I figured I should acknowledge it. But what DavidSt and quo-vadis said here ^^^ is exactly right.
07-09-2019 06:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 31,351
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 633
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #88
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-06-2019 03:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I mean. yeah---its a cautionary tale for schools that use an 80+ million dollar budget to play G5 football. Thats a category with one member.

I doesnt have to be that way. S MIss and LaTech may not be Alabama---but they field perfectly respectable teams in a number of sports---for only about 25 million a year---and they typically have a pretty darn good football team. It can be done.

Frankly, Im not one that is all that big on athletics needing to break even or deliver a profit. To me, its a student amenity and a marketing device. Both are expense items---not profit centers. I see them as the front porch of the university. I think there is value in that. So, if they lose 5, 10, or even 20 million---you can probably make a reasonable argument that they are still a benefit to the school. Once you break that 20 million mark---I think that argument gets substantially harder to make.

Here's where I am---I dont think any school should be spending 80 million on sports unless they have the ticket sales and donor base to keep the school subsidy in that 20 million or below range. A 40 million dollar athletic deficit is just too large to reasonably defend---especially when the current performance of the 2 big revenue sports is so far below expectations.
Largely correct. Large public universities generally have operating budgets of about $1B. $15M - $20M as a marketing expense isn't a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
07-10-2019 10:44 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #89
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 10:44 AM)panama Wrote:  
(07-06-2019 03:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I mean. yeah---its a cautionary tale for schools that use an 80+ million dollar budget to play G5 football. Thats a category with one member.

I doesnt have to be that way. S MIss and LaTech may not be Alabama---but they field perfectly respectable teams in a number of sports---for only about 25 million a year---and they typically have a pretty darn good football team. It can be done.

Frankly, Im not one that is all that big on athletics needing to break even or deliver a profit. To me, its a student amenity and a marketing device. Both are expense items---not profit centers. I see them as the front porch of the university. I think there is value in that. So, if they lose 5, 10, or even 20 million---you can probably make a reasonable argument that they are still a benefit to the school. Once you break that 20 million mark---I think that argument gets substantially harder to make.

Here's where I am---I dont think any school should be spending 80 million on sports unless they have the ticket sales and donor base to keep the school subsidy in that 20 million or below range. A 40 million dollar athletic deficit is just too large to reasonably defend---especially when the current performance of the 2 big revenue sports is so far below expectations.
Largely correct. Large public universities generally have operating budgets of about $1B. $15M - $20M as a marketing expense isn't a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Squandering $20m on marketing that doesn't work is a very big deal to your typical company with a $1B budget. In the private sector it would get you fired.
07-10-2019 05:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,737
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #90
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 05:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-10-2019 10:44 AM)panama Wrote:  
(07-06-2019 03:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I mean. yeah---its a cautionary tale for schools that use an 80+ million dollar budget to play G5 football. Thats a category with one member.

I doesnt have to be that way. S MIss and LaTech may not be Alabama---but they field perfectly respectable teams in a number of sports---for only about 25 million a year---and they typically have a pretty darn good football team. It can be done.

Frankly, Im not one that is all that big on athletics needing to break even or deliver a profit. To me, its a student amenity and a marketing device. Both are expense items---not profit centers. I see them as the front porch of the university. I think there is value in that. So, if they lose 5, 10, or even 20 million---you can probably make a reasonable argument that they are still a benefit to the school. Once you break that 20 million mark---I think that argument gets substantially harder to make.

Here's where I am---I dont think any school should be spending 80 million on sports unless they have the ticket sales and donor base to keep the school subsidy in that 20 million or below range. A 40 million dollar athletic deficit is just too large to reasonably defend---especially when the current performance of the 2 big revenue sports is so far below expectations.
Largely correct. Large public universities generally have operating budgets of about $1B. $15M - $20M as a marketing expense isn't a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Squandering $20m on marketing that doesn't work is a very big deal to your typical company with a $1B budget. In the private sector it would get you fired.

A 20 million dollar marketing budget on a billion dollars of revenue would be considered fantastic in the private sector. Typical marketing costs are around 7 to 10% in the business world. My guess is that its not just about pure enrollment growth numbers. Its about attracting a certain type of students they want who will pay "X-dollars" for "X number of semester hours" and who are more likely to be the kind of alums that become regular donors down the road. There are no doubt different ways to lure the type of student they want---but being one of only 130 FBS schools is probably a factor that shows up in their research.
(This post was last modified: 07-10-2019 11:34 PM by Attackcoog.)
07-10-2019 06:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,726
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 1434
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location:
Post: #91
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-09-2019 01:41 AM)scoscox Wrote:  Tigersmoke4 confirmed not mad and actually laughing

We all owe beer or wine to the mod who finally axed him.
07-10-2019 08:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 31,351
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 633
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #92
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 05:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-10-2019 10:44 AM)panama Wrote:  
(07-06-2019 03:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I mean. yeah---its a cautionary tale for schools that use an 80+ million dollar budget to play G5 football. Thats a category with one member.

I doesnt have to be that way. S MIss and LaTech may not be Alabama---but they field perfectly respectable teams in a number of sports---for only about 25 million a year---and they typically have a pretty darn good football team. It can be done.

Frankly, Im not one that is all that big on athletics needing to break even or deliver a profit. To me, its a student amenity and a marketing device. Both are expense items---not profit centers. I see them as the front porch of the university. I think there is value in that. So, if they lose 5, 10, or even 20 million---you can probably make a reasonable argument that they are still a benefit to the school. Once you break that 20 million mark---I think that argument gets substantially harder to make.

Here's where I am---I dont think any school should be spending 80 million on sports unless they have the ticket sales and donor base to keep the school subsidy in that 20 million or below range. A 40 million dollar athletic deficit is just too large to reasonably defend---especially when the current performance of the 2 big revenue sports is so far below expectations.
Largely correct. Large public universities generally have operating budgets of about $1B. $15M - $20M as a marketing expense isn't a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Squandering $20m on marketing that doesn't work is a very big deal to your typical company with a $1B budget. In the private sector it would get you fired.
It's 2%. And it's a cost center that works for FBS schools.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
07-10-2019 09:45 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NJ2MDTerp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,344
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
Post: #93
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-09-2019 06:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 06:19 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The question is that Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn. State, Pittsburgh and Boston College are in the wrong conference because the culture are different.

I agree with that. The northeast teams that are in the B1G and ACC should be in a northeast conference - Penn State, Syracuse, UConn, BC, Maryland, Rutgers, WVU, Pitt.
Adding UMass and Temple makes it a solid 10 school NE conference.
07-10-2019 10:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #94
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 10:44 AM)panama Wrote:  
(07-06-2019 03:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I mean. yeah---its a cautionary tale for schools that use an 80+ million dollar budget to play G5 football. Thats a category with one member.

I doesnt have to be that way. S MIss and LaTech may not be Alabama---but they field perfectly respectable teams in a number of sports---for only about 25 million a year---and they typically have a pretty darn good football team. It can be done.

Frankly, Im not one that is all that big on athletics needing to break even or deliver a profit. To me, its a student amenity and a marketing device. Both are expense items---not profit centers. I see them as the front porch of the university. I think there is value in that. So, if they lose 5, 10, or even 20 million---you can probably make a reasonable argument that they are still a benefit to the school. Once you break that 20 million mark---I think that argument gets substantially harder to make.

Here's where I am---I dont think any school should be spending 80 million on sports unless they have the ticket sales and donor base to keep the school subsidy in that 20 million or below range. A 40 million dollar athletic deficit is just too large to reasonably defend---especially when the current performance of the 2 big revenue sports is so far below expectations.
Largely correct. Large public universities generally have operating budgets of about $1B. $15M - $20M as a marketing expense isn't a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

most of that money is spoken for

if you have a $1B budget and you do $200 million in research then you are down to $800 million because zero of that research money is going to athletics

if you have $12,000 in housing and meals X 6,000 students that is $72 million

so now you are at $728 million

$270 million in state funding (most states do not allow this to go to athletics) that gets you to $458 million

if you have a $1B endowment that will produce about $50 million per year in spendable funds and most of that will be spoken for it will not just go to the general fund to do whatever

so now you are at $408 million

say $28 million in non athletics gifts $380 million

$300 million in tuition so that leaves $80 million from various things (most of which will be spoken for)

so you are looking at that $20 million coming from that $300 million in tuition

so you are looking at 6.7% of the available budget not 2%

and while that seems small you have to look at what that money could otherwise go to

if you have $200 million on faculty salaries then that $20 million is equal to 10% of your faculty salary budget

if you have 1,150 faculty and a student to faculty ratio of 23:1 then even 5% more faculty can get that to 21.8

10% more faculty 20.9

that can help rankings and the student experience in a number of ways

then with research if you are doing $200 million in research with 1,150 faculty then you are doing $174,000 per faculty member on average

so 5% more faculty doing the same average of research would do an additional $10 million in research per year

10% more faculty would do $20 million more in research per year

so spending $20 million per year of basically student tuition at a university with 1,150 faculty and $200 million in faculty salaries doing $200 million a year in research cost you at least $20 million per year in research dollars if you hire "average" faculty relative to your current faculty
07-11-2019 01:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bogg Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,846
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 154
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #95
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-09-2019 05:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  Even if true, that doesn't mean FCS makes sense. Pretty sure they dropped scholarships at one point in the 80s. Shouldn't have added them back.

Whether FCS as a level of competitive play should exist is a different discussion entirely. That being said, I would argue that

1) being able to keep your games on-campus and thus easily accessible by the students
2) being able to compete for national championships at your level of play and
3) not having to worry about accomodating football via conference affiliation

all have intrinsic value of their own. If the school is content having what amounts to a stand-alone program in its own single-sport conference, far be it from me to question it. It's like UConn's hockey team - so long as the school feels they have the money for the program, it's not hurting any other team, and they both put a couple thousand people in the stands so some group of students or alumni are getting perceived value out of it.
(This post was last modified: 07-11-2019 08:06 AM by Bogg.)
07-11-2019 08:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #96
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 10:29 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 06:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 06:19 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The question is that Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn. State, Pittsburgh and Boston College are in the wrong conference because the culture are different.

I agree with that. The northeast teams that are in the B1G and ACC should be in a northeast conference - Penn State, Syracuse, UConn, BC, Maryland, Rutgers, WVU, Pitt.
Adding UMass and Temple makes it a solid 10 school NE conference.

Yes, and it would be a Power conference too, and not a bad fit for Notre Dame's non-football stuff either.
07-11-2019 09:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #97
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 09:45 PM)panama Wrote:  
(07-10-2019 05:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-10-2019 10:44 AM)panama Wrote:  
(07-06-2019 03:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I mean. yeah---its a cautionary tale for schools that use an 80+ million dollar budget to play G5 football. Thats a category with one member.

I doesnt have to be that way. S MIss and LaTech may not be Alabama---but they field perfectly respectable teams in a number of sports---for only about 25 million a year---and they typically have a pretty darn good football team. It can be done.

Frankly, Im not one that is all that big on athletics needing to break even or deliver a profit. To me, its a student amenity and a marketing device. Both are expense items---not profit centers. I see them as the front porch of the university. I think there is value in that. So, if they lose 5, 10, or even 20 million---you can probably make a reasonable argument that they are still a benefit to the school. Once you break that 20 million mark---I think that argument gets substantially harder to make.

Here's where I am---I dont think any school should be spending 80 million on sports unless they have the ticket sales and donor base to keep the school subsidy in that 20 million or below range. A 40 million dollar athletic deficit is just too large to reasonably defend---especially when the current performance of the 2 big revenue sports is so far below expectations.
Largely correct. Large public universities generally have operating budgets of about $1B. $15M - $20M as a marketing expense isn't a big deal.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Squandering $20m on marketing that doesn't work is a very big deal to your typical company with a $1B budget. In the private sector it would get you fired.
It's 2%. And it's a cost center that works for FBS schools.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

It doesn't work for FBS schools, at least there's no evidence it does.

As for 2%, that figure is misleading, because as a state institution, much of the $1B budget is not discretionary, the great bulk of it is fixed by the legislature and is dedicated to stuff like infrastructure, maintenance, and faculty and staff salaries. Faculty have tenure and staff often have civil service protections.

So that $20m is a much bigger chunk of the budget that the school administration actually has control over. Unlike in the private sector, where the executives have control over basically everything.
(This post was last modified: 07-11-2019 09:27 AM by quo vadis.)
07-11-2019 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexanMark Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,637
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1326
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Post: #98
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 10:29 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 06:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 06:19 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The question is that Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia, Maryland, Penn. State, Pittsburgh and Boston College are in the wrong conference because the culture are different.

I agree with that. The northeast teams that are in the B1G and ACC should be in a northeast conference - Penn State, Syracuse, UConn, BC, Maryland, Rutgers, WVU, Pitt.
Adding UMass and Temple makes it a solid 10 school NE conference.
Nah...we good

Rather have Cincy and Louisville
07-11-2019 09:31 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,626
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #99
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-10-2019 08:27 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 01:41 AM)scoscox Wrote:  Tigersmoke4 confirmed not mad and actually laughing

We all owe beer or wine to the mod who finally axed him.

Such a shame. I will really miss all the references to "NBE", its "pathetic" ratings and the guarantee that its next contract will be lowered.

What finally got him banned?
07-11-2019 10:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gulfcoastgal Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,299
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 400
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
Post: #100
RE: UConn going broke a cautionary tale for Group of 5 schools
(07-11-2019 10:14 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  
(07-10-2019 08:27 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 01:41 AM)scoscox Wrote:  Tigersmoke4 confirmed not mad and actually laughing

We all owe beer or wine to the mod who finally axed him.

Such a shame. I will really miss all the references to "NBE", its "pathetic" ratings and the guarantee that its next contract will be lowered.

What finally got him banned?

(07-10-2019 08:14 AM)SigEpMike Wrote:  
(07-09-2019 02:09 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Man this is possibly the $#!++est board around. No wonder its dying. 01-wingedeagle01-wingedeagle glad I'm not a racist waiting to pounce on every opportunity to show my fangs and act like "that's not what I meant ".

Well, no need for you to be here, then.

The Memphis board gave him the boot the other day. Maybe it was site wide?
07-11-2019 10:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2024 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.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.