Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
Author Message
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #1
Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/
(This post was last modified: 01-30-2018 11:42 AM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
01-30-2018 11:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

thespiritof1976 Offline
Ancient Alien Theorist
*

Posts: 3,079
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 195
I Root For: Zeti Reticuli
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.
01-30-2018 12:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Renandpat Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 180
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Central State
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 12:13 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.

It's sustainable when the university's general fund and students fees (where applicable) can be given to the department. Note the words before the data: Revenue doesn’t include student fees or money transferred into the department by the university.
01-30-2018 12:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #4
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 12:13 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.


That's exactly what you're seeing. Basically every athletic program that competes in the G5 is well on track to lose 200,000,000 of taxpayer and tuition provided dollars on athletics in the next 10 years. That's who is making up the difference.

I was aware of that. Where I found this interesting was how the money is lost. So much on coaching salaries. So much on women's sports (which of course is driven by the need for equity after adding football).

If you'd like to see the filing for UCF (or any other public institution), all you'd have to do is write the Athletic Department and file a FOIA request for the NCAA filing. All schools have to report to the NCAA, but private schools can make their filings private. And they do.

Here's the numbers from USA today for most public schools in FBS. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/ You can click on the schools name to get a breakdown of the losses and the numbers for the last couple of years.
(This post was last modified: 01-30-2018 12:36 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
01-30-2018 12:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 24,698
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 995
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 11:41 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/

How old is this? That data is from 2 years ago (2015-2016 season).
01-30-2018 01:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,646
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 589
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #6
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
Dramatizes how many of these programs have to soak their students and academic side to balance their budgets.

Terrible. Only Texas and TAMU are truly viable. 07-coffee3
01-30-2018 03:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,646
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 589
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #7
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 01:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 11:41 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/

How old is this? That data is from 2 years ago (2015-2016 season).

You questioned the $17,000 in ticket revenue for Houston men's hoops. But that's what the form Houston filed with the NCAA says (see pages 8 & 70), it's not the newspaper's error. Maybe Houston lets students in for free?

https://s3.amazonaws.com/raw.texastribun...5-2016.pdf
(This post was last modified: 01-30-2018 03:57 PM by quo vadis.)
01-30-2018 03:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
58-56 Offline
Blazer Revolutionary
*

Posts: 11,645
Joined: Mar 2006
Reputation: 499
I Root For: Fire Ray Watts
Location: CathedraloftheDragon

BlazerTalk Award
Post: #8
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
Some (not all) of the expenses/losses are for scholarships, which are money moved from one university account to another but tagged at full price.

The data appears to be the most recent available but there are a few obvious errors in here, like Houston men's basketball with revenue of $233K compared to 360K for the women or a hair under 4mill for UTEP men's basketball. One would think Houston pulls at least as much basketball income as UTEP.
01-30-2018 04:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,407
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 349
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #9
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 04:00 PM)58-56 Wrote:  Some (not all) of the expenses/losses are for scholarships, which are money moved from one university account to another but tagged at full price.

The data appears to be the most recent available but there are a few obvious errors in here, like Houston men's basketball with revenue of $233K compared to 360K for the women or a hair under 4mill for UTEP men's basketball. One would think Houston pulls at least as much basketball income as UTEP.

Actually I'd assume UTEP does at least double but at least TRIPLE what Houston does in basketball....
01-30-2018 04:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,584
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 827
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 12:28 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:13 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.


That's exactly what you're seeing. Basically every athletic program that competes in the G5 is well on track to lose 200,000,000 of taxpayer and tuition provided dollars on athletics in the next 10 years. That's who is making up the difference.

I was aware of that. Where I found this interesting was how the money is lost. So much on coaching salaries. So much on women's sports (which of course is driven by the need for equity after adding football).

If you'd like to see the filing for UCF (or any other public institution), all you'd have to do is write the Athletic Department and file a FOIA request for the NCAA filing. All schools have to report to the NCAA, but private schools can make their filings private. And they do.

Here's the numbers from USA today for most public schools in FBS. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/ You can click on the schools name to get a breakdown of the losses and the numbers for the last couple of years.

What it details Tom is what will occur if men's football, basketball, and baseball (South)/hockey (North) ever become taxable. Once these programs are taxable then Title IX requirements disappear. Bye bye women's sports, except Softball which in the Southwest and Southeast and on the Pacific Coast can make money.

The Trump tax plan which passed already cuts out the tax deductions for donations made to buy ticket priorities. I consider that to be the first of several steps that will occur before the programs become taxable and stipends turn into pay which also will be taxable.

And think about that before saying it will never happen. The government would love a new revenue source from taxation. Scholarships for non profits will probably stay deductible. But the schools will at some point want to trim red ink. Accountants can zero out most tax liability, but having these programs taxed frees the Athletic Departments of these schools from having to comply with Title IX. That's a lot of red ink at the overwhelming majority of schools (were talking 10's of millions annually). Taxing the profitable programs frees them all to grow the number of players they engage to play. Governing forces will become the conference or a confederation of conferences which will have to set player limits the way the NCAA sets scholarship limits today. But other than that the NCAA won't even be needed. That's 70 million collectively in overhead the schools involved will save and that 70 million is disproportionately paid by the P5.

I could see the IOC providing some support for Olympic sports but the country club sports would be dead on the college campus. Tennis & Golf would be reduced to club level and the burden of competing would be on the players, if any wanted to assume it.

I would strongly urge you to take a look at the WSJ's economic impact list of college sports upon their respective regions. Even there the contrast is stark.

By the way the numbers you listed from USA Today are for 2016. Those numbers will updated for 2017 in April. Virtually all of the attendance, revenue, and value estimations come out from late March through early May every year and are for the previous calendar year.

But that said taxpayers everywhere need to look at these numbers. Segregation by income for the schools has been in preparation for the coming downsizing in all aspects of higher education. This includes the dropping of undergraduate enrollment standards by large state schools at the same time they tighten entrance requirements for post graduate work. They are positioning themselves for survival and that has included college sports realignment.

It would be wise for the strongest athletic programs in the G5 to align themselves similarly. If they do so they will survive.
01-30-2018 04:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #11
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 03:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 01:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 11:41 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/

How old is this? That data is from 2 years ago (2015-2016 season).

You questioned the $17,000 in ticket revenue for Houston men's hoops. But that's what the form Houston filed with the NCAA says (see pages 8 & 70), it's not the newspaper's error. Maybe Houston lets students in for free?

https://s3.amazonaws.com/raw.texastribun...5-2016.pdf

Its probably just UH getting the mens and women's basketball figures reversed. Maybe UH messed up on their filing. Either way, its their filing.
(This post was last modified: 01-30-2018 05:26 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
01-30-2018 05:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

gulfcoastgal Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,299
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 132
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
Yeah, I don't think there's uniformity when filling these out which can make some comparisons problematic. For example, I've been following media contracts and am interested in CUSA's 2015 filing. UNT lists $0 from media rights while UTEP claims $193,571 and UTSA $1,058,585. Most likely the institutions did not follow the same guidelines when itemizing. It doesn't mean totals are wrong, but some line items may not be derived from similar info across schools...which of course is on them.
01-30-2018 06:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,898
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 589
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 04:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:28 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:13 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.


That's exactly what you're seeing. Basically every athletic program that competes in the G5 is well on track to lose 200,000,000 of taxpayer and tuition provided dollars on athletics in the next 10 years. That's who is making up the difference.

I was aware of that. Where I found this interesting was how the money is lost. So much on coaching salaries. So much on women's sports (which of course is driven by the need for equity after adding football).

If you'd like to see the filing for UCF (or any other public institution), all you'd have to do is write the Athletic Department and file a FOIA request for the NCAA filing. All schools have to report to the NCAA, but private schools can make their filings private. And they do.

Here's the numbers from USA today for most public schools in FBS. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/ You can click on the schools name to get a breakdown of the losses and the numbers for the last couple of years.

What it details Tom is what will occur if men's football, basketball, and baseball (South)/hockey (North) ever become taxable. Once these programs are taxable then Title IX requirements disappear. Bye bye women's sports, except Softball which in the Southwest and Southeast and on the Pacific Coast can make money.

The Trump tax plan which passed already cuts out the tax deductions for donations made to buy ticket priorities. I consider that to be the first of several steps that will occur before the programs become taxable and stipends turn into pay which also will be taxable.

And think about that before saying it will never happen. The government would love a new revenue source from taxation. Scholarships for non profits will probably stay deductible. But the schools will at some point want to trim red ink. Accountants can zero out most tax liability, but having these programs taxed frees the Athletic Departments of these schools from having to comply with Title IX. That's a lot of red ink at the overwhelming majority of schools (were talking 10's of millions annually). Taxing the profitable programs frees them all to grow the number of players they engage to play. Governing forces will become the conference or a confederation of conferences which will have to set player limits the way the NCAA sets scholarship limits today. But other than that the NCAA won't even be needed. That's 70 million collectively in overhead the schools involved will save and that 70 million is disproportionately paid by the P5.

I could see the IOC providing some support for Olympic sports but the country club sports would be dead on the college campus. Tennis & Golf would be reduced to club level and the burden of competing would be on the players, if any wanted to assume it.

I would strongly urge you to take a look at the WSJ's economic impact list of college sports upon their respective regions. Even there the contrast is stark.

By the way the numbers you listed from USA Today are for 2016. Those numbers will updated for 2017 in April. Virtually all of the attendance, revenue, and value estimations come out from late March through early May every year and are for the previous calendar year.

But that said taxpayers everywhere need to look at these numbers. Segregation by income for the schools has been in preparation for the coming downsizing in all aspects of higher education. This includes the dropping of undergraduate enrollment standards by large state schools at the same time they tighten entrance requirements for post graduate work. They are positioning themselves for survival and that has included college sports realignment.

It would be wise for the strongest athletic programs in the G5 to align themselves similarly. If they do so they will survive.

Tennis and golf are fine. They don't cost a lot and since it is partial scholarships, brings in some tuition revenue from the "country club" types.
01-30-2018 07:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,898
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 589
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 04:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:28 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:13 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.


That's exactly what you're seeing. Basically every athletic program that competes in the G5 is well on track to lose 200,000,000 of taxpayer and tuition provided dollars on athletics in the next 10 years. That's who is making up the difference.

I was aware of that. Where I found this interesting was how the money is lost. So much on coaching salaries. So much on women's sports (which of course is driven by the need for equity after adding football).

If you'd like to see the filing for UCF (or any other public institution), all you'd have to do is write the Athletic Department and file a FOIA request for the NCAA filing. All schools have to report to the NCAA, but private schools can make their filings private. And they do.

Here's the numbers from USA today for most public schools in FBS. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/ You can click on the schools name to get a breakdown of the losses and the numbers for the last couple of years.

What it details Tom is what will occur if men's football, basketball, and baseball (South)/hockey (North) ever become taxable. Once these programs are taxable then Title IX requirements disappear. Bye bye women's sports, except Softball which in the Southwest and Southeast and on the Pacific Coast can make money.

The Trump tax plan which passed already cuts out the tax deductions for donations made to buy ticket priorities. I consider that to be the first of several steps that will occur before the programs become taxable and stipends turn into pay which also will be taxable.

And think about that before saying it will never happen. The government would love a new revenue source from taxation. Scholarships for non profits will probably stay deductible. But the schools will at some point want to trim red ink. Accountants can zero out most tax liability, but having these programs taxed frees the Athletic Departments of these schools from having to comply with Title IX. That's a lot of red ink at the overwhelming majority of schools (were talking 10's of millions annually). Taxing the profitable programs frees them all to grow the number of players they engage to play. Governing forces will become the conference or a confederation of conferences which will have to set player limits the way the NCAA sets scholarship limits today. But other than that the NCAA won't even be needed. That's 70 million collectively in overhead the schools involved will save and that 70 million is disproportionately paid by the P5.

I could see the IOC providing some support for Olympic sports but the country club sports would be dead on the college campus. Tennis & Golf would be reduced to club level and the burden of competing would be on the players, if any wanted to assume it.

I would strongly urge you to take a look at the WSJ's economic impact list of college sports upon their respective regions. Even there the contrast is stark.

By the way the numbers you listed from USA Today are for 2016. Those numbers will updated for 2017 in April. Virtually all of the attendance, revenue, and value estimations come out from late March through early May every year and are for the previous calendar year.

But that said taxpayers everywhere need to look at these numbers. Segregation by income for the schools has been in preparation for the coming downsizing in all aspects of higher education. This includes the dropping of undergraduate enrollment standards by large state schools at the same time they tighten entrance requirements for post graduate work. They are positioning themselves for survival and that has included college sports realignment.

It would be wise for the strongest athletic programs in the G5 to align themselves similarly. If they do so they will survive.

It you look at the AAC and CUSA expansions, the AAC pretty much went right down the line in CUSA picking the higher budget schools and then the CUSA did the same thing with the Sun Belt.
01-30-2018 07:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 24,698
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 995
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 03:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 01:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 11:41 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/

How old is this? That data is from 2 years ago (2015-2016 season).

You questioned the $17,000 in ticket revenue for Houston men's hoops. But that's what the form Houston filed with the NCAA says (see pages 8 & 70), it's not the newspaper's error. Maybe Houston lets students in for free?

https://s3.amazonaws.com/raw.texastribun...5-2016.pdf

Im just saying its almost a certainly that they reversed the revenue figures for mens and womens basketball when filing the form. Our mens basketball attendance is not great---but it drawfs womens support.
(This post was last modified: 01-30-2018 07:17 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-30-2018 07:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mikeinoki Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,148
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 92
I Root For: ECU & CRM 114
Location: The Beach
Post: #16
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 07:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 03:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 01:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 11:41 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/

How old is this? That data is from 2 years ago (2015-2016 season).

You questioned the $17,000 in ticket revenue for Houston men's hoops. But that's what the form Houston filed with the NCAA says (see pages 8 & 70), it's not the newspaper's error. Maybe Houston lets students in for free?

https://s3.amazonaws.com/raw.texastribun...5-2016.pdf

Im just saying its almost a certainly that they reversed the revenue figures for mens and womens basketball when filing the form. Our mens basketball attendance is not great---but it drawfs womens support.

As with most school's athletic finances, there is not always an easy answer about revenue and expenses. If Houston basketball had ticket sales of $17,232, with the same year's home attendance of 66,706, that would average out to $0.26 per seat. Incidentally, the U.S. Dept of Education (ope.ed.gov/athletics) reports Houston Basketball Total Revenues of $6,023,125. Go figure.

The 2015-16 season is the most recent set of revenue data.
01-30-2018 10:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

DawgNBama Offline
NCR Ranger
*

Posts: 2,486
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 58
I Root For: p-natal vitamin
Location: prenatal vitamins
Post: #17
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 04:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:28 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:13 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.


That's exactly what you're seeing. Basically every athletic program that competes in the G5 is well on track to lose 200,000,000 of taxpayer and tuition provided dollars on athletics in the next 10 years. That's who is making up the difference.

I was aware of that. Where I found this interesting was how the money is lost. So much on coaching salaries. So much on women's sports (which of course is driven by the need for equity after adding football).

If you'd like to see the filing for UCF (or any other public institution), all you'd have to do is write the Athletic Department and file a FOIA request for the NCAA filing. All schools have to report to the NCAA, but private schools can make their filings private. And they do.

Here's the numbers from USA today for most public schools in FBS. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/ You can click on the schools name to get a breakdown of the losses and the numbers for the last couple of years.

What it details Tom is what will occur if men's football, basketball, and baseball (South)/hockey (North) ever become taxable. Once these programs are taxable then Title IX requirements disappear. Bye bye women's sports, except Softball which in the Southwest and Southeast and on the Pacific Coast can make money.

The Trump tax plan which passed already cuts out the tax deductions for donations made to buy ticket priorities. I consider that to be the first of several steps that will occur before the programs become taxable and stipends turn into pay which also will be taxable.

And think about that before saying it will never happen. The government would love a new revenue source from taxation. Scholarships for non profits will probably stay deductible. But the schools will at some point want to trim red ink. Accountants can zero out most tax liability, but having these programs taxed frees the Athletic Departments of these schools from having to comply with Title IX. That's a lot of red ink at the overwhelming majority of schools (were talking 10's of millions annually). Taxing the profitable programs frees them all to grow the number of players they engage to play. Governing forces will become the conference or a confederation of conferences which will have to set player limits the way the NCAA sets scholarship limits today. But other than that the NCAA won't even be needed. That's 70 million collectively in overhead the schools involved will save and that 70 million is disproportionately paid by the P5.

I could see the IOC providing some support for Olympic sports but the country club sports would be dead on the college campus. Tennis & Golf would be reduced to club level and the burden of competing would be on the players, if any wanted to assume it.

I would strongly urge you to take a look at the WSJ's economic impact list of college sports upon their respective regions. Even there the contrast is stark.

By the way the numbers you listed from USA Today are for 2016. Those numbers will updated for 2017 in April. Virtually all of the attendance, revenue, and value estimations come out from late March through early May every year and are for the previous calendar year.

But that said taxpayers everywhere need to look at these numbers. Segregation by income for the schools has been in preparation for the coming downsizing in all aspects of higher education. This includes the dropping of undergraduate enrollment standards by large state schools at the same time they tighten entrance requirements for post graduate work. They are positioning themselves for survival and that has included college sports realignment.

It would be wise for the strongest athletic programs in the G5 to align themselves similarly. If they do so they will survive.

It would be sad to have all women’s sports go away, but some of those figures are really ghastly. I personally would keep women’s basketball, and other women’s sports that actually made $$, but women’s country club sports I would bring to an end unless a booster wanted to spare them along with sports just added solely for the purpose of Title IX, and just tax the profitable programs.
(This post was last modified: 01-31-2018 12:55 AM by DawgNBama.)
01-31-2018 12:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,288
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 04:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:28 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 12:13 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  If these numbers are accurate then how can a program survive ? It is not sustainable if you lose 20+ million every year. There has to be something else here we are not seeing.


That's exactly what you're seeing. Basically every athletic program that competes in the G5 is well on track to lose 200,000,000 of taxpayer and tuition provided dollars on athletics in the next 10 years. That's who is making up the difference.

I was aware of that. Where I found this interesting was how the money is lost. So much on coaching salaries. So much on women's sports (which of course is driven by the need for equity after adding football).

If you'd like to see the filing for UCF (or any other public institution), all you'd have to do is write the Athletic Department and file a FOIA request for the NCAA filing. All schools have to report to the NCAA, but private schools can make their filings private. And they do.

Here's the numbers from USA today for most public schools in FBS. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/ You can click on the schools name to get a breakdown of the losses and the numbers for the last couple of years.

What it details Tom is what will occur if men's football, basketball, and baseball (South)/hockey (North) ever become taxable. Once these programs are taxable then Title IX requirements disappear. Bye bye women's sports, except Softball which in the Southwest and Southeast and on the Pacific Coast can make money.

The Trump tax plan which passed already cuts out the tax deductions for donations made to buy ticket priorities. I consider that to be the first of several steps that will occur before the programs become taxable and stipends turn into pay which also will be taxable.

And think about that before saying it will never happen. The government would love a new revenue source from taxation. Scholarships for non profits will probably stay deductible. But the schools will at some point want to trim red ink. Accountants can zero out most tax liability, but having these programs taxed frees the Athletic Departments of these schools from having to comply with Title IX. That's a lot of red ink at the overwhelming majority of schools (were talking 10's of millions annually). Taxing the profitable programs frees them all to grow the number of players they engage to play. Governing forces will become the conference or a confederation of conferences which will have to set player limits the way the NCAA sets scholarship limits today. But other than that the NCAA won't even be needed. That's 70 million collectively in overhead the schools involved will save and that 70 million is disproportionately paid by the P5.

I could see the IOC providing some support for Olympic sports but the country club sports would be dead on the college campus. Tennis & Golf would be reduced to club level and the burden of competing would be on the players, if any wanted to assume it.

I would strongly urge you to take a look at the WSJ's economic impact list of college sports upon their respective regions. Even there the contrast is stark.

By the way the numbers you listed from USA Today are for 2016. Those numbers will updated for 2017 in April. Virtually all of the attendance, revenue, and value estimations come out from late March through early May every year and are for the previous calendar year.

But that said taxpayers everywhere need to look at these numbers. Segregation by income for the schools has been in preparation for the coming downsizing in all aspects of higher education. This includes the dropping of undergraduate enrollment standards by large state schools at the same time they tighten entrance requirements for post graduate work. They are positioning themselves for survival and that has included college sports realignment.

It would be wise for the strongest athletic programs in the G5 to align themselves similarly. If they do so they will survive.

I think you'd see a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth should whatever system arise create a disincentive for the sponsoring of women's sports.

I can certainly see major changes coming to how college athletics is regarded in tax law, but I do think lawmakers will be cognizant of the positives of non-revenue sports. While they would certainly love to create a new revenue stream, they tend to value their own personal power and influence above just about anything. So the question would be how much money would the Feds get at the end of the day and would it be worth all the bad PR?

At that, there are tons of wealthy and influential alumni that tend to be involved in raising funds for athletic departments. The same ones are often involved with raising funds to prop up non-revenue sports. I suspect there is a significant cross-section between these individuals and the high dollar political donors. After all, every major school has big time donors and these people tend to be the movers and the shakers in their respective communities...the same type of people who would be called upon to support serious political candidates. So the question then becomes how many of these people would be upset if their time and money ultimately went for naught?

Personally, I think the safer move for the lawmakers is to create a system that taxes athletic departments while offering tax credits for whatever money is spent on non-revenue sports. I'm sure there's a million other ways to play with it as well.

You might still see some sports cut even then because there's a point of diminishing returns, but I don't think you'd see a lot of big shakeups if that sort of provision was made.
01-31-2018 01:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,660
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 84
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #19
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 10:12 PM)mikeinoki Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 07:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 03:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 01:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 11:41 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/

How old is this? That data is from 2 years ago (2015-2016 season).

You questioned the $17,000 in ticket revenue for Houston men's hoops. But that's what the form Houston filed with the NCAA says (see pages 8 & 70), it's not the newspaper's error. Maybe Houston lets students in for free?

https://s3.amazonaws.com/raw.texastribun...5-2016.pdf

Im just saying its almost a certainly that they reversed the revenue figures for mens and womens basketball when filing the form. Our mens basketball attendance is not great---but it drawfs womens support.

As with most school's athletic finances, there is not always an easy answer about revenue and expenses. If Houston basketball had ticket sales of $17,232, with the same year's home attendance of 66,706, that would average out to $0.26 per seat. Incidentally, the U.S. Dept of Education (ope.ed.gov/athletics) reports Houston Basketball Total Revenues of $6,023,125. Go figure.

The 2015-16 season is the most recent set of revenue data.

DoE numbers should be understood as an accounting ledger and the amounts out have to match those in. The difference between gate and revenue is money transferred to the program to cover expenses from the department. That department money is from the school ("the institution").

The numbers in the OP article are a truer reflection because they do not count transferred monies.
01-31-2018 01:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 21,598
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 625
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Detailed Peek at College Finances for Athletics
(01-30-2018 01:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-30-2018 11:41 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A Texas news outlet, The Texas Tribune, has used FOIA requests to gather the financial reporting for all FBS schools in Texas.

Some people might find the data they uncovered useful. I found it interesting because it gave breakdowns by sport. It also covered teams in the SEC, BigXII, AAC, CUSA, and Sun Belt. It also as links to the actual NCAA report that has a lot MORE information, such as athletic department donations.

I wish they'd gotten a couple of FCS forms (maybe for Sam Houston or Lamar) and one from a big non-football public (UTA) while they were at it.

But still a useful data point if anyone wants to see a peek behind the curtain.

https://college-sports.texastribune.org/

How old is this? That data is from 2 years ago (2015-2016 season).
A year old. 2016-2017 fiscal year for virtually all colleges ended June 30, 2017.
01-31-2018 10:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2018 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, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.