(07-06-2019 04:16 PM)quo vadis 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.

Given that we have often clashed over the "front porch" concept, I am surprised to say we almost agree. E.g., concerning your $20m subsidy rule of thumb, if we look at the AAC, excluding the departing UConn, we see (from USA Today) these subsidies:

Cincy ..... $27m

UCF ....... $27m

Houston ... $26m

USF ......... $21m

And this is with the private schools like Tulsa, Temple, SMU, and Tulane not reporting.

And beyond the AAC, we see many other schools well above the $20m mark. E.g., four MAC schools are at $23m or above, two MWC schools are, four CUSA schools are, and two Sun Belt schools are.

That's an awful lot of G5 schools burning through very large subsidies chasing the dream.

I think the Orlando writer is right, this is unsustainable in the long run. UConn was just the first domino to fall.

IMO, "amenity" and "marketing" are both hard to justify in terms of immense subsidies. E.g., if football is an amenity, you don't need to be playing Florida or Georgia to be entertained. Many FCS schools provide their students with entertainment playing other FCS schools they have rivalries with. In Baton Rouge, sure, we have LSU, and they fill their stadium playing Alabama and Florida and Texas A/M. But across town, at HBCU Southern University, they have three days of intense tailgating before their home games vs schools like Jackson State, Alcorn State, and Texas Southern. Football is as big a part of their campus culture as it is at LSU.

As for marketing, schools like USF and UCF were booming their enrollment before football became a thing for them, so not sure what the connection is.

Yeah, ideally I'd like to see that subsidy get below 20. That said---I'd be more concerned if I thought this was a long term thing---but I dont think it is. Im pretty sure its about possible mid-2020 realignment and new revenue streams that are soon coming on line this year and next. Basketball has not pulled it weight as a revenue sport at UH---that is now changing. Additionally, Im pretty sure those figures are from before the opening of the new basketball arena. Basketball season ticket sales are up and the new Fertitta Center is now getting bookings as a venue for concerts a events we were not getting before. TDECU is going to be the home of an XFL team, so that will help. And of course, the new tv deal will help as well. Taken together---with the steady increase in student population this year and next, I suspect that will all get us below the 20 million subsidy if spending remains steady. Either way---the ability to get under that 20 million mark is available to the administration in the short term (although--they may grow spending a bit to stay in the mid 2020 realignment race).

My guess is if we see 2023-2027 come and go with no P5 golden tickets--the administration will almost certainly get that subsidy below the 20 million mark (at a minimum).